The U.S. Supreme Court just handed a free pass to Ta-Nehisi Coates and Oprah Winfrey, affirming a lower court’s dismissal of plagiarism claims against them. Five justices stepped aside, leaving the court unable to muster a quorum. Even the highest court can’t escape the shadow of corporate ties.
According to Bloomberg Law, Ralph W. Baker’s 2022 lawsuit accused Coates’ book “The Water Dancer” of ripping off his own “Shock Exchange,” but the Supreme Court’s May 19, 2025, order upheld the dismissal due to a lack of justices to hear it. Baker, representing himself, claimed his work on Black history and culture was unfairly echoed in Coates’ novel. Yet, the courts keep slamming the door on his case.
Baker first filed his suit in a New York federal court, alleging that Coates, Winfrey, and several companies plagiarized his book. The district court tossed it out, finding no substantial overlap. Baker’s dream of justice hit a brick wall early.
Not one to quit, Baker appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In December, the Second Circuit agreed with the lower court, stating, “Beyond relating to Black history and culture, the overall concepts of Shock Exchange and Coates’s work bear little overlap.” Woke or not, the judiciary seems unmoved by Baker’s cries of theft.
The Second Circuit’s ruling was clear: Baker’s and Coates’ books share themes, but not enough to scream plagiarism. It’s a tough pill for Baker, who sees his work as a prophetic warning of economic pain. Meanwhile, Coates’s star power and Winfrey’s clout seem untouchable.
Baker took his fight to the Supreme Court, hoping for a miracle. But with only four justices available, the court couldn’t even hear the case. The law demanded they affirm the lower court’s ruling, leaving Baker empty-handed.
Five justices—Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—recused themselves, citing potential conflicts. Four of them (Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson) have book deals with Penguin Random House, a defendant in the case via its parent company, Bertelsmann SE & Co. KGaA. Alito’s recusal reason remains a mystery, but it’s enough to make you wonder about cozy publishing ties.
The Supreme Court’s order on May 19, 2025, was blunt: “the qualified Justices think that the case cannot be heard.” No quorum, no hearing, no justice for Baker. It’s a technical knockout, but it stinks of insider protection.
Advocacy group Fix the Court cheered the recusals, saying, “Fix the Court has for many years said that the justices should recuse from petitions involving companies—i.e., their publishers—that pay them thousands if not millions of dollars nearly every year in advances, royalties or both.” They added, “And now they’ve finally done it.” Funny how “ethics” only kick in when it’s convenient for the elite.
Coates, represented by Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, and Winfrey, backed by Loeb & Loeb LLP alongside Apple Inc., walked away unscathed. Baker, fighting solo, never stood a chance against this legal firepower. The system seems rigged for the connected.
The lack of quorum isn’t just a procedural hiccup; it’s a symptom of a court tangled in corporate webs. When justices are in bed with publishers, how can the little guy expect a fair shake? Baker’s loss feels like a warning to anyone daring to challenge the cultural gatekeepers.
Baker’s “Shock Exchange” might resonate with those skeptical of elite narratives, but the courts aren’t buying it. The Second Circuit’s dismissal leaned heavily on the idea that Black history and culture are too broad to claim ownership. It’s a clever dodge, but it leaves Baker’s work in the dust.
The Supreme Court’s affirmation by default—equivalent to an equally divided court—means Baker’s case is dead in the water. He fought hard, but the deck was stacked. Actions have consequences, and going up against cultural titans like Coates and Winfrey rarely ends well.
This case isn’t just about plagiarism; it’s about who controls the narrative. Baker’s book, with its focus on inner-city kids and economic foresight, deserves a voice, but the courts have silenced it. The woke establishment, it seems, gets to write history unchallenged.
As the dust settles, Baker stands alone while Coates and Winfrey bask in their victory. The Supreme Court’s non-decision speaks volumes about a system that prioritizes power over principle. For those rooting for the underdog, this one stings.
