Republican Congressman Tim Burchett is facing sharp criticism after declaring that individuals convicted of sex crimes against children “deserve to be hanged in public.” The Tennessee lawmaker made the remark during a discussion about penalties for child exploitation offenses, framing his comments as a reflection of outrage over crimes against minors.

The statement immediately ignited fierce reactions from civil rights advocates, legal scholars, and even some fellow lawmakers who said the language crossed a dangerous line. While Burchett emphasized that he was referring to those found guilty through the judicial system, critics argued that calling for public executions evokes imagery that clashes with constitutional protections and modern legal standards.

Capital punishment remains legal in certain U.S. jurisdictions, but the Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty cannot be imposed for crimes in which the victim does not die. In a landmark 2008 decision, the Court held that executing someone for child rape violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, a ruling outlined in the Supreme Court’s opinion in Kennedy v. Louisiana. That precedent effectively bars capital punishment in non-homicide child sex crime cases under current constitutional law.

Burchett did not outline specific legislative proposals to implement his remarks. Instead, he framed the statement as an expression of moral outrage, saying the most severe crimes against children demand the harshest consequences. Supporters on social media praised his bluntness, arguing that the justice system often fails victims.

Opponents countered that inflammatory rhetoric risks undermining due process and could inflame public passions in ways that harm fair trials. Legal experts stressed that even in capital cases involving murder, public executions are not permitted under American law. Executions, where allowed, are conducted under strict protocols and are not public spectacles.

Advocacy organizations focused on child protection said the discussion should center on prevention, survivor support, and effective prosecution rather than symbolic punishments. They argue that improving investigative resources and ensuring consistent sentencing would better serve victims than calls for unconstitutional measures.