Well, the moral degradation of this once-great country shows no signs of slowing down. One day, people suddenly start insisting on “warrants” before letting federal agents into their homes, and the next an entire state may allow dancing without a license. Appalling.
As you know, dancing surged in New York City a few years ago when that Sodom and/or Gomorrah repealed a 1926 law making it illegal to operate any “public dance hall” or “cabaret” without a license. Not that those libertines waited until the repeal actually took effect. See “Stop That Dancing! Unlicensed Cabarets Are Still Illegal in New York” (Nov. 6, 2017). Well, predictably, now everybody in the state wants the same sort of freedom. This is what leniency breeds. See, e.g., ABC News, “Lawyers allege DHS is denying legal counsel to Minnesota detainees” (Jan. 18, 2026) (quoting attorney who claimed an ICE agent told him “if we let you see your clients, we would have to let all the attorneys see their clients, and imagine the chaos.”).
Still, New York’s governor, Kathy Hochul, who is up for reelection this year, openly pandered to the pro-dance lobby in her recent “State of the State” address. Among the pie-in-the-sky proposals Hochul outlined was the repeal of a similar state-wide restriction, saying she supported “dancing by default”:
Eliminating Outdated Restrictions on Dancing
For decades, complexity and lack of transparency in tavern, bar, and restaurant licensing has generated public confusion about dancing, often creating friction in communities. Under current rules, dancing is allowed in bars and taverns, after bureaucratic processes at the State Liquor Authority (SLA) and community board level[,] but is not always allowed in restaurants. Because of this, some applicants—especially those who want to operate as a restaurant at some times and a bar or tavern at other times—self-identify as restaurants but operate as nightclubs. This erodes community trust, leads to higher complaint volumes, and requires the SLA to enforce against dancing. [sic]
To improve trust and transparency and cut red tape, Governor Hochul will charge SLA with allowing dancing by default in taverns and bars and creating a new hybrid restaurant-tavern license. For bars and taverns, no processes or need for public hearings will change, and community boards will be able to maintain their role making further stipulations. There will be no change for restaurants, whose license types do not allow patron dancing. For applicants who want to operate as both a restaurant and bar or club at different times, the new hybrid license type will bring more transparency to the community, as the license will accurately reflect the character of the establishment. Qualifying license types will continue to require community disclosure and comment periods for dancing and performance dancing consistent with statutory obligations.
But having read that a few times now, it seems like nothing much would change. Bars and taverns would still have to get a dancing license, apparently subject to the veto of a “community board,” and restaurants would still be unable to get one at all. The only difference would be the new “hybrid license,” apparently meant to allow businesses that currently “operate as nightclubs” even though they “self-identify as restaurants” to end that embarrassing charade. I guess I support that, although I’m not sure labeling them as “hybrids” is the kind of acceptance they were hoping for.
As other past incidents suggest, not getting all worked up about people dancing is usually the better approach. See, e.g., “Congratulations, Lady Who Shut Down Dance by Citing Obscure Law” (Feb. 13, 2017); “In Michigan, You May Now Dance to the National Anthem” (Dec. 7, 2015); “No Dancing in Cottonwood Heights” (Oct. 20, 2015) (charges later appropriately dropped); “Settlement Reached in N.C. Dirty-Dancing Case” (Nov. 14, 2008). On the other hand, if you let some people do it, everybody will want to. Imagine the chaos.
