Brian Steel challenges use of rap lyrics as courtroom evidence

Attorney Brian Steel is challenging the judicial practice of using rap lyrics as evidence of criminal intent, labeling the trend discriminatory. During an appearance on T.I.’s podcast “expediTIously,” Steel argued that while creative works by authors like William Shakespeare or Stephen King are viewed as art, rap lyrics are frequently treated as literal statements of fact by prosecutors.

Steel contends that this practice violates the right to freedom of expression, extending his argument to include personal aesthetics such as facial tattoos. He noted that such evidence is often used to prejudice jurors against hip-hop artists.

This legal debate has been central to several high-profile cases. In the YSL racketeering case involving Young Thug, a judge ruled that prosecutors could introduce specific lyrics if connected to alleged crimes. Similarly, in the federal murder-for-hire trial of Lil Durk, a judge allowed certain song portions to be used while restricting others. Steel, who has represented both artists, continues to advocate for First Amendment protections in these contexts.