Brian Soucek's Avatar

Brian Soucek

@brsoucek.bsky.social

Professor at UC Davis Law School, where I teach con law & civil procedure and write about academic freedom & aesthetics. Author of The Opinionated University (U Chicago Press 2025) and Permitting Art (Cabinet). https://law.ucdavis.edu/people/brian-soucek

654 Followers  |  346 Following  |  70 Posts  |  Joined: 13.11.2024  |  2.0711

Latest posts by brsoucek.bsky.social on Bluesky

This:

27.06.2025 18:00 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

BREAKING:

CASA (plaintiff in Maryland birthright citizenship case) has now filed an amended complaint seeking class certification for similarly situated individuals impacted by Trump’s EO.

www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/wp-cont...

27.06.2025 17:31 β€” πŸ‘ 1685    πŸ” 391    πŸ’¬ 38    πŸ“Œ 17

Orders with no accompanying explanation have no precedential force beyond the specific facts they apply to. The district court should grant this motion, and the lower courts should keep on granting relief until the Supreme Court articulates a rule of decision to the contrary.

24.06.2025 00:58 β€” πŸ‘ 32    πŸ” 10    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Post image

BREAKING: A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to restore millions of dollars in canceled grants to University of California researchers, calling the terminations flagrantly illegal and unconstitutional. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

24.06.2025 01:07 β€” πŸ‘ 5418    πŸ” 1459    πŸ’¬ 71    πŸ“Œ 62

Absolutely this. Nicholas Confessore clearly wasn't going to let the actual decision get in the way of his thesis. To be clear: the Skrmetti Court is 3-3-3 on the question of "extending new constitutional protections to trans people."

19.06.2025 21:07 β€” πŸ‘ 4    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0
Tax Law as Muse Admission charges at Chicago’s small music venues are generally exempt from tax. Β But a few years ago, officials came after clubs that hosted rock, hip‑hop

You can find the whole fascinating story here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... or here: publications.lawschool.cornell.edu/lawreview/20...

12.06.2025 21:14 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Tax Law as Muse
Brian Soucek & Jennifer C. Lena
Admission charges at Chicago’s small music venues are gen-
erally exempt from tax. But a few years ago, officials came after
clubs that hosted rock, hip-hop, country, and DJ performances,
claiming that those kinds of music weren’t β€œcommonly regarded
as part of the fine arts.” Controversy exploded, critics derided
the idea of turning tax collectors into β€œculture police,” and the law
was quickly changed to avoid accusations of unconstitutionality.
Plaintiffs across the country have similarly alleged that
selective tax exemptions for certain arts but not others amount
to unconstitutional content discrimination. They claim that the
government has no business judging what is art or deciding
what types of art to favor. But if this is so, then all levels of
government in the United States have been acting unconstitu-
tionally for an awfully long time.
This Article recovers a largely forgotten history of federal tax-
ation of the arts, dating back to World War I. Federal admissions
and cabaret taxes grew large enough by the Second World War to
change the course of music, hastening the decline of big band jazz,
the death of tap, and the growth of bebop. Fights for exemptions
embroiled Congress in debates over the value of various arts and
their distinction from β€œmere” amusements like burlesque, band
concerts, and the circus. And as the legislative history reveals,
the lines that got drawn reflect the race, gender, and class dispar-
ities of the voices Congress heard during the nearly five decades
the federal admissions tax remained in effect.

Tax Law as Muse Brian Soucek & Jennifer C. Lena Admission charges at Chicago’s small music venues are gen- erally exempt from tax. But a few years ago, officials came after clubs that hosted rock, hip-hop, country, and DJ performances, claiming that those kinds of music weren’t β€œcommonly regarded as part of the fine arts.” Controversy exploded, critics derided the idea of turning tax collectors into β€œculture police,” and the law was quickly changed to avoid accusations of unconstitutionality. Plaintiffs across the country have similarly alleged that selective tax exemptions for certain arts but not others amount to unconstitutional content discrimination. They claim that the government has no business judging what is art or deciding what types of art to favor. But if this is so, then all levels of government in the United States have been acting unconstitu- tionally for an awfully long time. This Article recovers a largely forgotten history of federal tax- ation of the arts, dating back to World War I. Federal admissions and cabaret taxes grew large enough by the Second World War to change the course of music, hastening the decline of big band jazz, the death of tap, and the growth of bebop. Fights for exemptions embroiled Congress in debates over the value of various arts and their distinction from β€œmere” amusements like burlesque, band concerts, and the circus. And as the legislative history reveals, the lines that got drawn reflect the race, gender, and class dispar- ities of the voices Congress heard during the nearly five decades the federal admissions tax remained in effect.

Unearthing the historical context behind discriminatory
tax exemptions like those in Chicago helps shed significant
light on a notoriously difficult First Amendment problem: how
to distinguish selective support of the arts from censorship.
Perhaps surprisingly, the history bolsters the constitutionality
of tax schemes like Chicago’s. But at the same time, the his-
tory shows that government meddling in the artsβ€”not least
through the tax codeβ€”runs far deeper than even its critics
realize. Over the last century, tax law in the United States has
not just discriminated among the arts; it has helped determine
what gets counted among the arts in the first place. And as
Chicago’s example proves, tax law continues to do this today,
helping shape the perceived status and nature of performances
by everyone from DJs to drag queens, and symphonies to strippers.
Desirable as government subsidies for the arts might be, to see their effects is to realize the need for broader popular involvement in deciding who and what should receive them.

Unearthing the historical context behind discriminatory tax exemptions like those in Chicago helps shed significant light on a notoriously difficult First Amendment problem: how to distinguish selective support of the arts from censorship. Perhaps surprisingly, the history bolsters the constitutionality of tax schemes like Chicago’s. But at the same time, the his- tory shows that government meddling in the artsβ€”not least through the tax codeβ€”runs far deeper than even its critics realize. Over the last century, tax law in the United States has not just discriminated among the arts; it has helped determine what gets counted among the arts in the first place. And as Chicago’s example proves, tax law continues to do this today, helping shape the perceived status and nature of performances by everyone from DJs to drag queens, and symphonies to strippers. Desirable as government subsidies for the arts might be, to see their effects is to realize the need for broader popular involvement in deciding who and what should receive them.

Think the government shouldn't be defining what's art? Think the arts deserve government funding? Uh oh...you can't think both. My article with the amazing @jenniferlena.bsky.social is finally out, and it tells a 100-year history of tax law shaping what we see as art versus other forms of amusement.

12.06.2025 21:11 β€” πŸ‘ 4    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0
Post image

Professor @brsoucek.bsky.social‬ recently participated in the 2025 Second Circuit Judicial Conference at the historic Sagamore Resort in Bolton Landing, N.Y. He spoke as part of the plenary session β€œArt & Legal Efforts to Silence, Tame and Cage It.” Read more at the link: bit.ly/4mKGczc

#UCDavisLaw

11.06.2025 23:19 β€” πŸ‘ 4    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Hey institutional neutrality folks: now that Trump’s military trans ban is back in effect, are you going to say anything about the fact that you’re violating your own nondiscrimination policies when you host military recruiters? Is that an attack on your mission?

06.05.2025 18:27 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 2    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Thanks Jean! It was a pleasure to be on the show with you. Such impressive work you’ve done to make Law Day so powerful this year!

01.05.2025 19:23 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

He retired in 2022

26.04.2025 16:08 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

I was waiting for someone to post this. Federal courts ordered the Biden administration to engage in negotiations with another country. This is complex territory for sure.

But how much negotiation is really required to say "you know that guy we're paying you to hold? Put him on our plane tomorrow"?

17.04.2025 15:27 β€” πŸ‘ 184    πŸ” 48    πŸ’¬ 5    πŸ“Œ 1
Post image

Perfect timing for the new edition of the @aaup.bsky.social #Redbook!

16.04.2025 20:50 β€” πŸ‘ 4    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

That’s amazing, Allison! I can’t wait to follow along

15.04.2025 15:24 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0

Interestingly, this letter is signed by Robert Hur; Hur was the MD USA during Trump I, and then the person assigned to investigate Biden's post-VP handling of documents. He wrote that Biden would present himself to a jury β€œas a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

14.04.2025 17:30 β€” πŸ‘ 16    πŸ” 2    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
New Report: Most Students Say Colleges Promote Free Speech While freedom of speech remains a hot-button issue in higher ed, most undergraduates feel like they’re free to speak their minds on campus, according to a new report by the Lumina Foundation and Gallu...

www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-t...

09.04.2025 16:46 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
Night of Ideas 2025: (un)Common Ground | KQED The Bay Area's biggest celebration of creativity and critical thought is back at the San Francisco Public Library and Asian Art Museum!

So excited to be a part of this year's #nightofideas at @sfpubliclibrary.bsky.social, πŸ—£οΈ about #universities + #freespeech . w/ @brsoucek.bsky.social + @dzambrano.bsky.social at 9 pm in the Hormel LGBTQIA Ctr, 3rd Flr. Capacity: 75 (est.) with standing room, so come early! ❀️‍πŸ”₯ www.kqed.org/event/5064

05.04.2025 15:42 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 2    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Happening tonight at the @sfpubliclibrary.bsky.social!

05.04.2025 15:17 β€” πŸ‘ 3    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

🧨

03.04.2025 20:59 β€” πŸ‘ 4    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
Night of Ideas 2025: (un)Common Ground | KQED The Bay Area's biggest celebration of creativity and critical thought is back at the San Francisco Public Library and Asian Art Museum!

Full schedule and link to free registration here:

www.kqed.org/event/5064

04.04.2025 15:07 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Post image Post image

Bay Area folks: come join me tomorrow night @kqednews.kqed.org ’s Night of Ideas at the SF Public Library, where I’ll be debating institutional neutrality with @stanfordlaw.bsky.social’s Diego Zambrano. 9pm, and it’s free!
@ucdavislaw.bsky.social @ucdavis.bsky.social

04.04.2025 15:04 β€” πŸ‘ 4    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 1

The book is better because of you, @jneuf.bsky.social!

01.04.2025 22:51 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Balkinization: The Tenth Demand? A group blog on constitutional law, theory, and politics

The latest evidence that attempts at appeasement won’t work:

balkin.blogspot.com/2025/03/the-...

01.04.2025 21:19 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Well, this seems pretty darn timely!

01.04.2025 18:15 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 1    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

The book isn't out yet, but there's more info here: press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/bo...

01.04.2025 16:47 β€” πŸ‘ 1    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Post image

We've got a cover! My editor describes it as "juxtaposing the staid picture universities would like to present of themselves with the opinions they explicitly or implicitly express. It’s a bold cover for a bold book!"
@ucdavislaw.bsky.social @uchicagopress.bsky.social

01.04.2025 16:45 β€” πŸ‘ 28    πŸ” 2    πŸ’¬ 1    πŸ“Œ 2

This is also at least the fourth version of this take to appear in @nytimesoped.bsky.social this month.

30.03.2025 07:32 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

Judge Berzon here: πŸ”₯

20.03.2025 18:09 β€” πŸ‘ 0    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0
Preview
A Statement from Constitutional Law Scholars on Columbia | Eugene Volokh, Michael C. Dorf, David Cole We write as constitutional scholarsβ€”some liberal and some conservativeβ€”who seek to defend academic freedom and the First Amendment in the wake of the

A strong statement from a diverse group of constitutional scholars: www.nybooks.com/online/2025/...

20.03.2025 13:36 β€” πŸ‘ 20    πŸ” 13    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 1

Institutional neutrality at work!

15.03.2025 00:04 β€” πŸ‘ 2    πŸ” 0    πŸ’¬ 0    πŸ“Œ 0

@brsoucek is following 20 prominent accounts