Although there have been cases in the past where rap songs have been linked to gang violence, it cannot be ignored that rap is an art, a form of self-expression. It is inherently abstract in that it uses things like metaphors and hyperbole to get a point across. Using any lyrics to point to a concrete fact is therefore certain to have its limits. Besides the obvious limitation in the use of the lyrics, we should ask ourselves if we would really want artists to be scared to express themselves because of the risk of it being used against them in a court of law, especially because it is often used for political resistance. It would increase the power the government has over artists and in supressing resistance. What is to say that rappers would not pivot to another form of music? Would you then propose that it should apply to that form of music as well? Because of the certain limits in the use of lyrics and the further complications it would have in the repression of political resistance and artistic expression more broadly, rap lyrics should not be used as evidence in criminal trials.

Yedidya wants you to believe that it is always clear cut what is meant by the lyrics of an artist, forgetting that the difference between a detailed diary and a rap song is that the latter is inherently a form of art and the other is not. Art is made by an artist. The jury doesn't decide the meaning of a piece of art, the artist does. Whether the story is exagerrated, mostly fictitious or entirely disconnected, is only really known by the artist who could twists. Besides the jury is limited in their understanding by their limited (shared) experience. Should we really decides someones fate by something so subjective? Art is something that historically has been protected for a reason, a change in that would certainly be impactful. The previously mentioned effects of repression and fear would come about. Yedidya has still not answered my question about the possibility of just pivoting to another genre and what that would mean for the whole music scene.

Freedom of expression is deeply embedded in the US, supported by the first amendment and a long line of Supreme Court decisions. It is something essential for a free society. Once you allow the government to censor someone, and yes it is a form of censorship when someone can be criminalized by things they have said in a song, you give it the power to possibly censor you, how unconsequential it might seem. Even if you don't find the inherent risks pertinent enough, it stays true that a song by itself doesn't prove someone is guilty. It may however provide clues as to what really happened, clues that could be used in further investigations to possibly get evidence. When you make the lyrics themselves incriminating, it is easy to imagine what happens next. Rappers stop mentioning any crimes they have comitted and that oh so helpful tool disappears. I say don't make those lyrics themselves incriminating, but use them to gather real evidence.