The Case Against the Death Penalty

Emergency vehicles at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution left after the halted execution of Christa Pike on Wednesday, Sept. 30, 2026, in Nashville, Tenn.

Recently, America has faced the need to reevaluate the continued practice of the death penalty. The issue surfaced following a mishandled execution attempt in Tennessee. Additionally, the Trump administration initially planned to publicly broadcast an execution, but backtracked after facing intense backlash. These situations highlight the inherent flaws and inhumanity of capital punishment.

On Oct. 8, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth disclosed plans to publicly livestream the execution of former Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan. This execution would be the first military execution in the United States in over sixty years. The decision drew criticism from military officials, the pope, and members within the same political party. Eventually, President Trump decided against the livestream, although the execution by firing squad will proceed.

Eight days prior, Tennessee’s attempt to execute Christa Pike failed. She endured two doses of lethal injection, resulting in her hospitalization. This event raises questions about why efforts persist to sustain the death penalty despite evident cruelty.

Earlier this year, Tennessee attempted and failed to execute Tony Carruthers, subjecting him to brutal pain in the process. Medical staff struggled for over 90 minutes to insert an IV line and eventually abandoned the attempt. These experiences reveal the harsh reality that lethal injections aim to hide. Altering the method of execution does not change its inherent cruelty.

In Alabama, during the 2024 execution by nitrogen hypoxia, Kenneth Smith suffered visibly despite promises of a painless death. In South Carolina, a firing squad execution of Mikal Mahdi in 2025 ignited similar concerns. Byron Black’s 2025 execution highlighted pain as he conveyed distress during lethal injection. His autopsy showed fluid in his lungs, resembling drowning. Such incidents reflect the brutal truth about execution practices.

There is a constitutional issue at play. Challenging execution methods requires proposing alternative methods, turning the Eighth Amendment’s aim of preventing cruel punishment into a paradox.

The Eighth Amendment promotes human dignity, which should influence how punishment is viewed overall. The dark record of execution methods and the idea of televised executions prompt serious reflection on the death penalty’s future.

Executions hidden from public view mask the trauma for those directly involved, such as victims’ families and legal teams, leaving them to deal with the psychological aftermath alone. Secrecy only hides suffering, making indifference easier.

The proposed livestream by the Pentagon, and the subsequent withdrawal, invite a chance to rethink our approach to capital punishment. The true challenge lies in applying the scrutiny that opposed the broadcast to examining the death penalty itself.

Yasmin Cader, deputy executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, stresses the importance of ending the death penalty in accordance with human dignity.