Travis Scott Files Supreme Court Brief: Use of Rap Lyrics in Death Sentence Violates Constitution

 

Houston-born rapper Travis Scott has filed an amicus curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court, arguing that prosecutors' reliance on a defendant's rap lyrics to justify a death sentence was unconstitutional and unfairly targeted the genre of rap music.

The filing, submitted on March 9, 2026, supports James Garfield Broadnax, a Black man convicted in 2009 of a double murder near Garland, Texas. After his conviction, prosecutors presented the nearly all-white jury with over 40 pages of Broadnax's handwritten rap lyrics during the sentencing phase. The jury requested to review the lyrics twice before deciding on capital punishment, leading to Broadnax's placement on death row.

In Scott's brief—filed by his legal team, including attorney Alex Spiro (known for representing high-profile clients like Jay-Z)—the artist contends that this approach violated Broadnax's First Amendment rights. Prosecutors argued that Broadnax posed a future danger simply because he engaged in "gangster rap," which the brief describes as "a categorical and straightforwardly unconstitutional content-based penalty on rap music as a form of expression."

Scott emphasized that rap, "primarily created by and historically associated with minority artists," qualifies as protected artistic and political expression under the First Amendment. Using such lyrics out of context as evidence of criminal propensity, the brief argues, risks subjecting the entire genre to prosecution and perpetuates bias. It calls on the Supreme Court to grant Broadnax's petition and clarify the constitutional limits on admitting protected speech as proof of dangerousness.

The move aligns with a separate amicus brief filed the same day by other prominent artists, including Killer Mike, T.I., Young Thug, Fat Joe, and N.O.R.E., along with music scholars and arts organizations. They similarly criticized the use of lyrics to "stoke racial and anti-rap bias" in Broadnax's case.

This development highlights ongoing debates over the admissibility of rap lyrics in criminal trials, where critics argue the practice disproportionately affects Black defendants and treats artistic expression as literal confessions rather than creative work.

The Supreme Court has yet to decide whether to hear the case, but the involvement of major figures in hip-hop underscores the broader cultural and legal implications for how rap is viewed in the justice system. Broadnax's execution is currently scheduled, though stays or reviews could follow if the Court intervenes.