What bills related to execution methods were filed in the 2025–2026 Indiana legislative sessions?

1. The slate of bills: what was filed and who sponsored them

Republican lawmakers filed several measures in the short 2026 session aimed at broadening Indiana’s execution toolbox beyond the state’s current sole method, lethal injection; those measures include Senate Bill 11 (SB 11) and a House measure identified as HB 1119 (also tracked as HB 119 in some reports), with sponsorship credited to senators including Michael Young, Chris Garten and James Tomes and house authors identified in press compilations and civil‑liberties tracking ^{[4] [2] [3]}.

2. SB 11 — reauthorizing the firing squad and statutory amendments

SB 11 was introduced as a Senate bill that would amend existing Indiana Code provisions to permit execution by firing squad when lethal injection cannot be carried out or when the condemned requests another method; the introduced version of SB 11 is publicly filed in the legislature’s document system ^{[4] [1]}.

3. HB 1119 (and related House language) — firing squad plus nitrogen hypoxia

House proposals tracked as HB 1119 would add both firing squad executions and nitrogen hypoxia (a form of execution by induced hypoxia) to authorized methods, making nitrogen hypoxia an alternative alongside a firing squad in certain circumstances, language corroborated by local reporting and advocacy group summaries ^{[3] [2] [1]}.

4. Additional, unconventional proposals: who pulls the trigger

Separate from method expansion, Rep. Bob Morris introduced a distinct, attention‑grabbing bill — HB 1287 — that would require the state prison warden to select an execution team drawn from members of the Indiana General Assembly who voluntarily put their names forward, a measure Morris framed as legislative oversight though critics saw it as politically provocative ^{[5] [6]}.

5. Lawmakers who pushed multiple measures and the rationale offered

Rep. Jim Lucas authored multiple bills during the same session that would allow execution by firing squad or nitrogen hypoxia if the Indiana Department of Correction commissioner deemed it advisable because of drug availability or if an inmate requested the method; reporting summarizes Lucas as the sponsor of several such proposals though some local stories do not list a single bill number for each of his filings ^{[7] [8]}.

6. Reactions, advocacy positioning and committee movement

The bills have drawn organized opposition from groups including the ACLU of Indiana and the Indiana Catholic Conference, which denounced the proposals as inhumane and warned of secrecy around implementation, while prosecutors urged the legislature to preserve capital punishment as a prosecutorial tool; SB 11 gained enough traction to earn committee hearings and, in at least one account, measures concerning firing squad and gas execution methods moved out of a House committee in January 2026 ^{[2] [9] [8]}.

7. Political context, claims about drug shortages, and competing narratives

Supporters argued drug shortages and rising costs for lethal‑injection drugs justify alternatives, and some sponsors framed the bills as a practical “fail‑safe” for carrying out lawful sentences or accommodating federal needs; critics countered that the drug‑availability argument is overstated and that the bills reflect ideological escalation rather than operational necessity ^{[10] [8] [3]}.

8. What’s next — procedural calendar and reporting limits

The short session schedule meant these bills faced tight committee deadlines and an uncertain path to final passage, with Republican leadership not committing publicly to advancing them during the condensed session; available reporting and the posted introduced bill text confirm filings and committee activity but do not provide final enactment outcomes in the sources reviewed here ^{[10] [4] [9]}.