In what could be the first military execution since 1961, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is formally requesting President Donald Trump’s approval to carry out the death sentence of former Army Maj. Nidal Hasan. Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist, was convicted in 2013 for the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood, Texas, which left 13 dead and 32 wounded.
“I am 100 percent committed to ensuring the death penalty is carried out for Nidal Hasan,” Hegseth said in a statement to The Hill. “This savage terrorist deserves the harshest lawful punishment for his 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood. The victims and survivors deserve justice without delays”
MUST READS
The Fort Hood Massacre: A Timeline of Tragedy
On November 5, 2009, Hasan entered the Soldier Readiness Processing Center at Fort Hood and opened fire with a semiautomatic handgun. Among the victims was a pregnant soldier. Hasan later admitted to the attack, claiming he was defending the “Islamic Empire” against U.S. military actions.
Despite his confession, military law required a full trial. Hasan represented himself, called no witnesses, and attempted to plead guilty—an option unavailable under military law. He was convicted of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.
Legal Battles and Appeals
Hasan’s legal team pursued multiple appeals over the years, challenging both the conviction and the sentence. These efforts culminated in April 2025 when the U.S. Supreme Court denied his final appeal, clearing the path for execution.
Supporters of the death penalty argue that justice has been delayed for too long. Survivors like retired Army veteran Alonzo Lunsford, who was shot multiple times during the attack, have expressed relief at the news. “He doesn’t deserve to breathe,” Lunsford said, recalling the trauma and loss.
Opponents of the execution cite concerns about due process and the precedent of military executions. The last such execution occurred in 1961, when Pvt. John Bennett was hanged for rape and attempted murder.
Why This Matters
Hasan’s case is more than a legal milestone—it’s a test of how the U.S. military handles justice for its own. The outcome could redefine military capital punishment and signal how future cases involving terrorism within the ranks are prosecuted. For victims and their families, it represents long-awaited closure. For the nation, it raises questions about justice, accountability, and the limits of military law.
