Insurance carriers are now permitted to participate in the plan-confirmation process, even when a plan is “insurance neutral.” How do recent Supreme Court rulings change the confirmation process, or will the Bankruptcy Code permit debtors to alter the rights of insurance carriers over their objection of insurance and bind them to the terms of the plan? Finally, there are no circuit splits, no nonconsensual third-party releases under a plan — or is the issue still unsettled when the plan “pays claims in full,” and what does it mean to “consent” to a release? Opt-in, opt-out, negative notice: What works? This panel provides an overview of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc., et al. and Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al. and how they impact a debtor’s ability to confirm a plan. The panelists discuss how debtors and insurance carriers will need to work to address their competing needs. The panelists also discuss how debtors will address mass-tort bankruptcies without the third-party-release tool or workarounds, and will look to the case law and confirmed plans in circuits where nonconsensual releases are not permitted.