Rapper BG has to hand over new song lyrics to the government

Last week, a federal judge ruled that BG, a rapper known for the 1999 hit “Bling Bling,” must provide the government with copies of the lyrics of all new songs as a condition of his supervised release. While prosecutors can generally impose a variety of otherwise illegal restrictions on released inmates, critics argue that this restriction is an unconstitutional pre-emptive restraint on free speech.

In 2012, BG, whose real name is Christopher Dorsey, was sentenced to 14 years in prison for illegal possession of a firearm and obstruction of justice. After serving 11 years, Dorsey was released in February. In May, prosecutors filed a motion accusing Dorsey of violating the terms of his bail by releasing songs “in which he again glorifies murder and drug trafficking and threatens those who cooperate with the police.”

“Mr. Dorsey’s conduct directly contradicts the goals of probation – rehabilitation and development into a responsible, law-abiding member of our community,” prosecutors wrote. “It is impossible for any reasonable person to watch these new videos … and understand Mr. Dorsey’s past and conclude that Mr. Dorsey is serious about his rehabilitation.”

Prosecutors asked that Dorsey be prohibited from “promoting and glorifying gun violence/murder and disability in his songs and at his concerts.” Last Friday, federal judge Susie Morgan of New Orleans denied the request, writing that the condition could constitute an unconstitutional pre-emption of Dorsey’s free speech.

“The Court concludes that the additional condition is undoubtedly not sufficiently clear and specific to serve as a guide to the conduct of the defendant and those entrusted with his supervision,” Morgan wrote. Yet despite this admission, it seriously limited Dorsey’s free speech. “To address the Government’s legitimate concerns, the Court will impose a special condition requiring the defendant to provide the United States Parole Board with a copy of the lyrics of any song he writes prior to the production or promotion of that song, and that those lyrics be made available to the Government.”

Although this restriction sounds outrageous, supervised release is a complicated mess for many former prisoners. “When it was introduced in 1984, federal supervised release was intended to be used sparingly to keep an eye on offenders who posed a risk to public safety or needed additional support to reintegrate into society,” Reasonby CJ Ciaramella wrote last month. “However, it is applied by default … and it sends many others back to prison for minor violations that might not warrant such a harsh response.”

Although supervised release conditions are often onerous, some First Amendment experts argue that Dorsey’s supervised release conditions nevertheless constitute an unconstitutional preemptive restriction on free speech.

“Courts typically give the government more leeway when it comes to restricting speech under probation, but that leeway is not narrow and doesn’t really have anything to do with deterring past criminal behavior or rehabilitation,” JT Morris, a senior attorney at the Foundation For Individual Right And Expression, told Reason“This order requires this artist to release the lyrics of every song he writes, regardless of the content of the song. And that’s just going too far.”