Rap lyrics were used as evidence in a death sentence. The case could clarify fundamental questions.
Several prominent rap artists have backed a man in a US Supreme Court case whose own rap lyrics were used in his trial as an argument for a death penalty.
The case concerns James Garfield Broadnax, who has been on death row for years. He receives support from Travis Scott, Killer Mike, TI, Young Thug, Fat Joe and NORE, among others.
The rappers have filed so-called amicus curiae letters. In it, they argue that the use of rap lyrics in the criminal case against Broadnax violated fundamental constitutional principles. His lawyers have asked the court to suspend the execution scheduled for April 2026 and to review the case.
Jury resorted to rap lyrics
Broadnax was convicted in 2009 for a fatal robbery the year before. The crime occurred near Garland.
Guilt and punishment were decided by a jury that, according to the defense, consisted almost entirely of white jurors. Black candidates had previously been excluded from the selection process.
During the phase of the trial in which the sentence was being decided, prosecutors introduced handwritten rap lyrics by Broadnax into the proceedings. In total there were around 40 pages of lyrics.
As The New York Times reports, the jury even asked twice during their deliberations to be allowed to view these texts again. According to the defense, they played a key role in portraying Broadnax as a particularly dangerous person.
Travis Scott’s team criticizes the criminalization of rap
Travis Scott’s legal team filed its own amicus brief with the Supreme Court. This clearly criticizes the public prosecutor’s argument.
The lawsuit alleged that James Garfield Broadnax posed a future danger simply because he wrote “gangster rap.” This logic actually amounts to a punishment of rap music as an artistic expression.
However, rap – like any other art form – is protected by the freedom of expression of the First Amendment. Using rap music as evidence of alleged criminal propensity could exceed the constitutional limits of state law enforcement.
Attorney Ellyde R. Thompson told Rolling Stone that the case touches on fundamental constitutional questions. A death sentence should never be based on protected artistic expression.
Artists see racist prejudices in the process
Another letter, supported by Killer Mike among others, also argues against the use of the lyrics. The signatories emphasize that rap lyrics are often fictional and should not be understood as autobiographical statements. Exaggerated depictions of violence, sex and even crime have been part of the genre’s narrative conventions for decades.
According to supporters, Broadnax’s texts were irrelevant to the question of guilt anyway, as they were only introduced when deciding on the sentence. Instead, the public prosecutor’s office tried to use the lyrics to reinforce prejudices against rap music and black artists. The texts were used to make Broadnax appear dangerous and to serve anti-black stereotypes.
Lawyer Chad Baruch said the case gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to draw a clear line and end the criminalization of rap as an art form.
Editorial recommendations
Texas rejects criticism
Representatives of the state of Texas reject the allegations. They argue that the defense raised its objections to the use of the rap lyrics too late. In addition, the lyrics were only a small part of the prosecution’s argument.
Killer Mike contradicted this account in an interview with The New York Times. Art should not be interpreted as a confession. “No matter how beautiful or how cruel it sounds, it’s still art,” said the rapper. It is an interpretation of human thoughts, not an admission of guilt.
Fundamental question for rap in the legal system
The involvement of several rap artists in the Broadnax case is therefore also understood as part of a larger debate. Critics have argued for years that rap music is often misunderstood or deliberately misinterpreted in the US justice system.
The Supreme Court’s decision could have significance beyond the individual case. It could clarify whether and to what extent artistic expression – especially rap lyrics – may be used as evidence in criminal proceedings in the future.
