Travis Scott Argues Use of Rap Lyrics in Death Sentence Was Unconstitutional

Rapper joins Killer Mike and others in filing briefs with Supreme Court in support of Texas man whose lyrics were used in conviction

Published on Mar. 9, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Travis Scott, Killer Mike, and other prominent rappers have filed briefs with the Supreme Court in support of a Black man in Texas who was sentenced to death, in part based on the use of his own rap lyrics as evidence. The man, James Garfield Broadnax, was convicted in 2009 of a double murder, and prosecutors cited his lyrics during the sentencing phase to argue he was likely to be dangerous in the future. Scott and the other artists argue this use of rap lyrics as evidence is unconstitutional, as it amounts to criminalizing a form of artistic expression primarily associated with minority artists.

Why it matters

This case raises important questions about the limits of using artistic expression, particularly rap music, as evidence in criminal trials. Critics argue that the use of rap lyrics in this way unfairly targets and stereotypes a genre of music predominantly created by Black artists, violating their First Amendment rights. The outcome could set a precedent on the admissibility of rap lyrics as evidence going forward.

The details

In 2009, James Garland Broadnax, a Black man, was convicted by an nearly all-white jury of killing two men during a robbery in Garland, Texas. During the sentencing phase, prosecutors introduced Broadnax's own rap lyrics as evidence that he was likely to be dangerous in the future. The jury reviewed 40 pages of Broadnax's handwritten lyrics multiple times before deciding he should be sentenced to death. Broadnax's lawyers have now asked the Supreme Court to halt his execution and review the case, arguing the use of his lyrics was unconstitutional.

  • Broadnax was convicted in 2009.
  • Broadnax's execution is set for next month.

The players

James Garfield Broadnax

A Black man convicted in 2009 of a double murder in Texas, who was sentenced to death in part based on the use of his own rap lyrics as evidence.

Travis Scott

A prominent rapper who has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing the use of Broadnax's rap lyrics as evidence was unconstitutional.

Killer Mike

A rapper who joined in filing an amicus brief with the Supreme Court alongside other artists, music scholars, and arts organizations in support of Broadnax.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The prosecutors argued Mr. Broadnax was likely to be dangerous in the future simply because he engaged in 'gangster rap'.”

— Travis Scott (Rolling Stone)

“At a certain level of abstraction, the reality is even more problematic: taking rap music out of context subjects the entire genre to prosecution.”

— Travis Scott (Rolling Stone)

“This case exemplifies the racial prejudice that infects a criminal proceeding when the State uses a defendant's rap lyrics to capitalize on anti-rap bias, the misinterpretation of rap lyrics, and anti-Black bias triggered by rap music.”

— Killer Mike and others (Rolling Stone)

“No matter how beautiful it sounds, or how horrific it may sound, it's still just art. It's an interpretation of the human spirit. It is not an admission of guilt.”

— Killer Mike (The New York Times)

What’s next

The Supreme Court will decide whether to grant a writ of certiorari and review the lower court's decision in Broadnax's case.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing debate over the use of rap lyrics as evidence in criminal trials, and the concerns that such practices unfairly target and stereotype a genre of music predominantly created by minority artists, potentially violating their constitutional rights to free expression.