Whether an appellate court can materially alter a consummated bankruptcy plan without permitting a new vote of creditors or whether a material alteration requires vacatur of the confirmation order and a new creditor vote

In Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. , 603 U.S. 204 (2024), this Court held ce rtain provisions in a confirmed Chapter 11 bankruptcy plan unlawful and then vacated the order confirming the plan and re-manded for further proceedings in which creditors would be afforded a fresh opportunity to vote on the new plan conforming to this Court’s ruling. Because the order confirming the Purdue Pharma plan had been stayed pending appeal, the plan had not been consummated, and this Court accordingly did not ad-dress the question whether, when an appellate court invalidates material provisions of a fully consummated bankruptcy plan, credito rs must be afforded an opportunity to renegotiate and vote on a conforming bankruptcy plan. See id. at 226. The question presented here is the question left unanswered by Purdue Pharma—an issue of critical importance to partici-pants in Chapter 11 bankruptcies and on which the circuits are divided: Whether an appellate court can materially alter a consummated plan of reorganization without per-mitting a new vote of creditors or whether a material alteration by an appellate court requires a vacatur of the order confirming the plan and a new creditor vote.