“Bob Marley Did Not Confess to Having Shot a Sheriff”: Music Industry Backs RAP Act to Ban Use of Lyrics as Evidence in Court

In a sweeping show of solidarity, the music industry is once again uniting behind a powerful legislative push to safeguard creative expression. The Restoring Artistic Protection (RAP) Act, reintroduced on July 24 by Democratic Reps. Hank Johnson of Georgia and Sydney Kamlager-Dove of California seek to prohibit prosecutors from using song lyrics—particularly in rap music—as admissible evidence in U.S. criminal and civil trials, unless they can prove beyond a doubt that the words were meant to be taken literally. At its heart, the bill is a response to a troubling legal trend disproportionately affecting Black artists, often blurring the line between art and confession.

The RAP Act has garnered renewed support from major music industry players such as the Recording Academy, RIAA, Universal Music Group, and Warner Music Group. These organisations argue that courts are unfairly weaponising lyrics, especially in hip-hop, while overlooking similar storytelling techniques in other genres. As Rep. Johnson pointedly stated, “Bob Marley did not confess to having shot a sheriff. And Johnny Cash did not confess to shooting ‘a man in Reno, just to watch him die.’” The bill aims to restore balance and fairness by ensuring courts consider context, not cultural bias.

This legislative push comes on the heels of high-profile legal battles involving artists like Young Thug, whose lyrics were cited as key evidence in a criminal case alleging gang involvement under RICO statutes. Though Thug—real name Jeffery Williams—eventually secured a plea deal after over 900 days in custody, the use of his music in court has sparked intense debate over artistic freedom and racial profiling. Similarly, in Drake’s defamation lawsuit concerning Kendrick Lamar’s 2024 diss track Not Like Us, legal experts warned that interpreting every lyric as fact threatens both free speech and the integrity of the judicial process.

Industry executives are voicing strong support for the bill’s revival. “Musical lyrics of all genres can be alliterative, fantastical, boastful and at times, even hyperbolic,” said Jeffrey Harleston, General Counsel at Universal Music Group. “But what they are not intended to be—or marketed as—is ‘truth.’” Recording Academy CEO Harvey Mason Jr. added, “Weaponizing lyrics or other creative works in court is a harmful tactic that stifles artistic expression and undermines the voices of not just musicians, but all who create and shape culture.”

While the RAP Act failed to pass when first introduced in 2022, advocates believe this time could be different. With growing awareness of the cultural and legal ramifications tied to the use of lyrics in trials, momentum is building. As RIAA COO Michele Ballantyne noted, “All too often Rap and Hip-Hop artists have been punished for the same kind of hyperbole and imagery other genres routinely use without consequence. Courts should consider relevance, not assumptions.” Whether this renewed effort will finally draw the line between art and evidence remains to be seen—but the music world is making its stance loud and clear.