What's happening
This bill restricts the use of a defendant's creative or artistic expression as evidence in criminal trials, setting strict admissibility standards.
Why it matters
Raises the bar for using creative works (like music, lyrics, or art) as evidence by requiring courts to find them literally relevant, directly tied to the alleged crime, and uniquely probative. helping protect artists from having fictional or metaphorical content misused against them.
Requires prosecutors to prove, with “clear and convincing evidence,” that the creative expression is not just relevant, but that it factually connects to the crime and to a disputed issue in the case. making it harder for prosecutors to rely on artistic works as circumstantial evidence.
Mandates that judges redraft, limit, and present any allowed creative expression in the least prejudicial way possible. aiming to minimize bias and ensure juries aren’t unfairly swayed by potentially inflammatory lyrics, poems, or other expressive works.
Defines “creative expression” broadly, covering music, dance, visual art, literature, film, and more. ensuring that the protections extend to a wide range of artistic activities and not just specific genres or formats (like rap lyrics).
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Limit Art as Court Evidence
Plain English, a few words. Used as the page title.
Sponsors
History
- Ordered to third reading cal.24
- Substituted for A123
- Referred to codes
- Delivered to assembly
- Passed senateVote 38–23
- Advanced to third reading
- 2nd report cal.
- 1st report cal.175
- Referred to codes
Companion bill
The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.
Limit Art as Court Evidence
Assembly Floor Calendar · Sponsor Catalina Cruz
Full text
2 pagesUnderlined is new[Struck] is removedOfficial text on nysenate.gov ↗
STATE OF NEW YORK
464
2025-2026 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE (Prefiled)
January 8, 2025
Introduced by Sen. HOYLMAN-SIGAL -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Codes
AN ACT to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to rules of evidence concerning the admissibility of evidence of a defendant's creative expression
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. The criminal procedure law is amended by adding a new section 60.77 to read as follows: § 60.77 Rules of evidence; admissibility of evidence of defendant's
creative expression.
1. Evidence of a defendant's creative or artistic expression, whether original or derivative, may not be received into evidence against such defendant in a criminal proceeding unless such evidence is determined by the court to be relevant and admissible, after an offer of proof by the proponent of such evidence outside the hearing of the jury, or such hearing as the court may require, and an on-the-record statement by the court of the findings of fact essential to its determination.
2. In order to overcome the presumption of inadmissibility of evidence of defendant's creative expression, the proffering party must affirmatively prove by clear and convincing evidence:
(a) literal, rather than figurative or fictional, meaning and, where the work is derivative, that the defendant intended to adopt the literal meaning of the work as the defendant's own thought or statement;
(b) a strong factual nexus indicating that the creative expression refers to the specific facts of the crime alleged;
(c) relevance to an issue of fact that is disputed; and
(d) distinct probative value not provided by other admissible evidence.
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD00146-01-5
3. Where the court admits creative expression as criminal evidence, the court has a duty to apply careful redactions, provide limiting instructions, and consider the least prejudicial means of presenting the creative expression to the fact-finder.
§ 2. Section 1.20 of the criminal procedure law is amended by adding a new subdivision 46 to read as follows:
46. "Creative expression" means the expression or application of creativity or imagination in the production or arrangement of forms, sounds, words, movements or symbols, including but not limited to music, dance, performance art, visual art, poetry, literature, film and other such objects or media.
§ 3. This act shall take effect immediately.
Reflowed for reading: line numbers and page breaks removed. Cite the official text.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to rules of evidence concerning the admissibility of evidence of a defendant's crea- tive expression
Purpose
The purpose of this legislation is to protect freedom of speech and artistic expression in New York State. This bill effectuates the enhanced free speech protections provided by the New York State Consti- tution, ensuring that criminal defendants are tried based upon evidence of criminal conduct, not the provocative nature of their artistic works and tastes.
Summary of specific provisions
SECTION 1: Amends the criminal procedure law by adding a new section 60.77, Rules of evidence; admissibility of evidence of defendants' crea- tive expression.
Section 2
Amends the criminal procedure law by adding a new section 1.20(46), Definition of "creative expression"
Section 3
Establishes the effective date.
Justification
There is no New York without art, whether it is provoking or inspiring, beautiful or crude. As recognized by the New York State Court of Appeals many decades ago, New York is "a cultural center for the Nation" that has "long provided a hospitable climate for the free exchange of ideas." Immuno AG. v. Moor-Jankowski, 77 N.Y.2d 235, 249 (1991). This is not happenstance, but the direct result of the enhanced protections that this State's Constitution provides for speech and creative expression.
Recent scholarship has highlighted a disturbing trend poised to threaten the haven New York has always provided its artists. In courtrooms across the country, artists' musical works are being admitted against them as "evidence" in criminal proceedings. Just as concerning, the mere appre- ciation of others' music-whether through reposting lyrics, performing, or simply listening-is also being used as "evidence." Unchecked, these practices chill free expression, transform the figurative into fact, and warp criminal courts into instruments for suppressing provocative speech. Moreover, these practices ignore the foundational principle that a criminal case should be tried on the facts and not on a person's "propensity" to commit the crime.
Rap has come under scrutiny for decades, being blamed by the media for criminal activity, and admitted as evidence of criminal behavior by the artist. Social scientists have linked anti-rap attitudes and racially discriminatory behavior. But rap is just like any other creative expression. The New Jersey Supreme Court wrote that "one cannot presume that simply because an author has chosen to write about certain topics, he or she has acted in accordance with those views" (State v. Skinner, 218 N.J. 496, 517, 521 (2014)). The court noted that no one believes that Bob Marley actually "shot the sheriff," or that there's a man buried in Edgar Allan Poe's floorboards.
This legislation would guarantee freedom of creative expression in New York by prohibiting prosecutors from using creative expression as crimi- nal evidence against a person without clear and convincing proof that there is a literal, factual nexus between the creative expression and the facts of the case.
Legislative history
S.1738 of 2023-2024 (Hoylman-Sigal): Passed Senate
A.127 of 2023-2024 (Cruz): Died in Third Reading
S.7527 of 2021-2022 (Hoylman): Passed Senate
A.8681 of 2021-2022 (Cruz): Ordered to Third Reading Rules Calendar
Fiscal implications
This legislation will have no fiscal implications for State or local government.
Effective date
This act shall take effect immediately.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.