Idaho is inching closer to becoming the first U.S. state to adopt firing squads as its primary method of execution, a decision that has sparked significant debate in the lead-up to the highly anticipated trial of Bryan Kohberger, the suspect in the tragic murders of four University of Idaho students. Currently, Idaho, along with Utah, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Mississippi, permits the use of firing squads for executions. However, none of these states employ this method as their main form of capital punishment, according to data from the Death Penalty Information Center. The proposed legislation, House Bill 37, has advanced to the Senate floor after passing the Senate Judiciary and Rules Committee, marking a critical step toward making firing squads the go-to execution method in Idaho. The bill comes at a time when lethal injection, the state’s current primary method, has faced criticism following a botched execution last year. With nine inmates currently on death row in Idaho, the conversation about the state’s execution practices has taken on new urgency.
The push for firing squads has been championed by bill sponsor Rep. Bruce Skaug, who has long advocated for the method as a more reliable alternative to lethal injection. Skaug’s stance was reinforced by the failed execution of Thomas Eugene Creech, a serial killer who survived his scheduled lethal injection in 2022. Creech’s case was the fourth in recent years where an inmate survived a lethal injection, highlighting the potential flaws in this method. Skaug has argued that firing squads are not only more certain but also less prone to legal challenges and more humane than other execution methods. While lethal injection remains the primary method of execution in Idaho, the bill’s progress reflects a growing willingness among lawmakers to explore alternative approaches to capital punishment.
Not everyone, however, is convinced that firing squads are the right solution. Sen. Dan Foreman, a Republican from Viola, expressed strong opposition to the bill during committee discussions. Foreman described the method as “cruel” and “inhumane,” arguing that it undermines the dignity of the state. His dissent stood out as he was the only Republican on the committee to voice opposition to the measure. For House Bill 37 to become law, it must pass both the Idaho House and Senate and avoid a gubernatorial veto. The debate over the bill has also raised broader questions about the ethics and practicality of capital punishment in Idaho and beyond.
The timing of this legislative push coincides with the high-profile case of Bryan Kohberger, who is accused of murdering four University of Idaho students in November 2022. Kohberger, a 28-year-old former graduate student, faces four counts of first-degree murder and one count of felony burglary. The victims—Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin—were all 20 or 21 years old, and their deaths sent shockwaves through the small college town of Moscow, Idaho. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty in the case, which has drawn national attention and raised questions about the role of capital punishment in addressing such heinous crimes.
Kohberger’s trial is set to begin later this year, and the case has already seen several notable developments. Among these is the submission of Kohberger’s mental health records to prosecutors, a move that could potentially influence the outcome of the trial. According to Boise-based defense attorney Edwina Elcox, who has closely followed the case, the defense may be seeking to use these records as a mitigating factor to argue against the death penalty. Idaho does not recognize the insanity defense, but the records could still play a role in swaying the jury or judges. The case has also highlighted the complexities of capital punishment, particularly in cases where mental health is a factor.
As the debate over firing squads and the death penalty continues, Idaho finds itself at the center of a national conversation about justice, ethics, and the methods used to carry out capital punishment. The outcome of House Bill 37 and the Kohberger trial will undoubtedly shape the future of capital punishment in Idaho and could have broader implications for other states grappling with similar issues. While proponents argue that firing squads offer a more reliable and humane alternative to lethal injection, opponents remain steadfast in their belief that the method is outdated and beneath the dignity of the state. For now, Idaho stands poised to make history as it weighs the moral, legal, and practical implications of adopting firing squads as its primary execution method.
