Law & Justice · North America

Four recusals leave Supreme Court unable to review copyright ruling

Four Supreme Court justices recused themselves from a copyright petition, leaving the court without the quorum needed to consider it. The Fifth Circuit ruling in the case therefore remains in place, while the underlying dispute concerns songwriter Cyril Vetter’s claim to rights in “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love).”

AI-assisted synthesis · Based on 5 outlets' reporting · Article text read from 3 of 5 outletsHow it's made

View timeline · 5 entries

5 outletsLatest reporting Oct 19, 9:34 PM UTC3 min read

Coverage: Mostly CenterL 0 · C 2 · R 1 · 2 unrated

Updat3 graphic · Map data: Natural Earth Natural Earth (public domain)

What happened

Key facts

The Supreme Court could not consider a petition in BMG Rights Management v. Vetter because four justices recused themselves.
The Supreme Court's lack of quorum means the 5th Circuit ruling will stand.
The supplied source excerpt does not verify the justices’ publishing relationships or the claim about BMG Rights Management’s ownership.
The supplied source excerpt does not verify the names of the recused justices, the number of eligible justices, or the quorum figure.

The brief

Four Supreme Court justices recused themselves from a copyright petition, leaving too few eligible members for the court to consider it. The petition challenged the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in BMG Rights Management v.

Vetter, a dispute over songwriter Cyril Vetter’s rights to “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love).” With five justices eligible and six required for a quorum, the Supreme Court did not take up the petition, and the Fifth Circuit ruling remains in place. The justices who recused themselves were Sonia Sotomayor, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The Washington Examiner reported that each had published with Penguin Random House, whose parent company owns BMG Rights Management. The outlet identifies that corporate relationship alongside the recusals; it does not establish that the relationship caused any individual justice to step aside. Vetter wrote the song with Donald Smith.

The two transferred their rights in 1963, according to Music Business Worldwide and the San Jose Sun. Vetter later sought to reclaim the rights through a termination notice sent in 2019, with the change taking effect in 2022. The outlets describe the dispute as involving rights to the song after that notice, including claims concerning ownership outside the United States.

The San Jose Sun reported that Vetter sued Resnik Music Group in 2023, alleging that it refused to relinquish copyright claims abroad. U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick ruled for Vetter in 2025 and declared him the sole worldwide owner of the copyright, the outlet reported.

Music Business Worldwide says the Fifth Circuit upheld that decision on January 12, 2026; the San Jose Sun also reports an affirmance in January. The Supreme Court’s quorum problem prevented it from considering the petition, rather than producing a new ruling on the copyright dispute.

The Washington Examiner describes the consequence as the lower-court ruling being affirmed as if the justices had not taken up the case. Music Business Worldwide characterizes the petition as ending without a decision on its merits, while MLex’s headline says the worldwide copyright ruling remains intact.

The practical result is that the Fifth Circuit decision continues to govern the case. Music Business Worldwide notes that the decision binds federal courts in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.

The underlying ownership dispute, as described by the San Jose Sun, also concerns rights claimed abroad; the Supreme Court’s inability to consider the petition leaves the lower-court outcome undisturbed.

Why it matters

Vetter’s copyright claim and the Fifth Circuit ruling remain consequential for the parties to BMG Rights Management v. Vetter because the Supreme Court did not consider the petition.
The Washington Examiner identifies a potential institutional-interest overlap: all four recused justices had published with Penguin Random House, whose parent company owns BMG Rights Management.
The dispute concerns worldwide copyright ownership, while Music Business Worldwide says the Fifth Circuit ruling binds federal courts in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.

What to watch next

Whether BMG Rights Management or Vetter takes further action after the Supreme Court leaves the Fifth Circuit ruling in place.
How the Fifth Circuit ruling is applied in federal courts in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.
Whether the parties continue to contest copyright claims abroad, an issue raised in the account of Vetter’s suit.

How it's being covered

Coverage analysisShow details

6 source articles · 5 unique outlets

Outlet political mix: Mostly Center· 2 Center · 1 Right · 2 unrated

Where the outlets are based: Unknown 60% · US/Canada 40%

Outlet political mix

Mostly Center

Left

Center

Right

0 outlets

2 outlets

1 outlet

The marker shows coverage balance: each unique outlet counts once. 2 unrated outlets are not included.

Geography

Where the outlets covering this story are based.

5 unique outletsDominant coverage: US/Canada

All5 US/CA2 · 40%Unknown3 · 60%

How we measure coverage

How outlets' accounts compare

2 framing differences · 1 uncorroborated claim · 1 information gap

The reports repeat the same account with different emphasis; its central claims are not independently confirmed in the reporting Updat3 read.Compared across 3 reports whose article text Updat3 read; 2 other outlets were checked by headline only.

Framing / emphasis differences

Sources emphasise different angles, actors or consequences of the same reporting.

The Washington Examiner emphasizes the four recusals and the six-justice quorum threshold; Music Business Worldwide focuses on the petition ending without a ruling on its merits.
The San Jose Sun foregrounds Vetter’s worldwide ownership claim and the earlier district and appeals court rulings; the Washington Examiner centers the Supreme Court’s inability to take up the petition.

Updat3: These are differences of emphasis, not disputes about what is reported. They do not show that the reported claims are true.

One-sided or uncorroborated claims

Claims that come from one party or one source family and are not independently corroborated.

The Washington Examiner says the four justices had published with Penguin Random House, whose parent company owns BMG Rights Management.

Updat3: Not independently corroborated yet — treat as a claim, not an established fact.

Not established by the reporting

Information the available reporting does not contain or confirm. This is a gap, not a disagreement.

The sources do not explain why each justice recused themselves individually.

Updat3: Updat3 cannot conclude anything about this from the current sources.

Timeline

Developments from this story's sources, dated background we compiled and fact-checked, and our earlier coverage. Each row says which.

1869
Congress set the Supreme Court’s quorum at six justices in the Judiciary Act of 1869.
Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
1974
The current general standard appears in 28 U.S.C. § 455, which Congress substantially revised in 1974.
Background · from our historical context
1976
Congress enacted the Copyright Act of 1976.
Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
2008
Bertelsmann reorganized its music business as BMG Rights Management.
Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
2013
Bertelsmann became the sole owner of BMG.
Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3

How we got here

Before the Supreme Court petition in *BMG Rights Management v. Vetter*, the Fifth Circuit had issued the decision that the petition sought to have reviewed.

That appellate ruling followed a copyright dispute between BMG Rights Management and Vetter, placing the case within the federal courts’ ordinary path from a trial-court judgment to appellate review and, in some cases, a request for Supreme Court review.