Governor Newsom signed AB 1815 on September 26, 2024. This amended the definitions of race and protective hairstyles as they relate to anti-discrimination laws. The biggest changes ensured that the definition of hair texture and hair styles include “braids, locs, and twists.” It also removed the term “historically associated with race” and changed it simply to “associated with race.”

With this expansion, there’s a better understanding that any hair style associated with race is protected by discrimination laws. It doesn’t matter if that hair or hair style uses hair extensions or not, beads or not, or head wraps. Shegerian Conniff wants you to know discrimination and harassment are not allowed in any business or public school. 

A store owner cannot discriminate against a customer who has dreadlocks, and a hiring manager cannot refuse to hire a qualified job applicant because of that applicant’s afro. A co-worker cannot make hurtful or rude comments about another worker’s braids. Any actions that discriminate or harass based on a person’s protected hair texture or style are illegal under the CROWN Act.

What Is the CROWN Act?

In 2019, the CROWN Coalition partnered with Dove and State Senator Holly J. Mitchell to pass the CROWN (Create a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair) Act in California. The statute created through this partnership offered protection from discrimination regarding hair texture or style in both public schools and workplaces.

The need for the CROWN Act was clear as over 66% of Black women admitted they had changed their hair style for a job interview. Of those women, 41% straightened their hair. That’s just a small segment of alarming facts about how raced-based hairstyles impact a person’s success or treatment at school and work.

• 66% of Black children in majority-white schools have experienced race-based hair discrimination, and 100% of Black girls report experiencing that discrimination by the time they were 10.
• A quarter of Black women believe they were denied a job because of their hair.
• About 20% of Black women between the ages 25 to 34 have been sent home due to their hair’s texture or style.
• Black women with textured or coiled hair are twice as likely to experience workplace harassment or aggression.

People are people and whether they have braids, coils, or curls doesn’t affect their ability to learn, assist, and thrive at school or work. With the CROWN Act’s passage in 2019, the protection against discrimination has expanded to several other states. Besides California, states that have passed discrimination laws regarding hair texture or style include:

• Alaska
• Arizona
• Arkansas
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Delaware
• Illinois
• Louisiana
• Maine
• Maryland
• Massachusetts
• Michigan
• Minnesota
• Nebraska
• Nevada
• New Jersey
• New Mexico
• New York
• Oregon
• Tennessee
• Texas
• Vermont
• Virginia
• Washington

Examples of Violations of the CROWN Act and the Court Cases Involving Them

It helps to understand exactly what discrimination or harassment looks like when it comes to hair texture and styles. 

Darryl George

One of the most recent cases involving the CROWN Act involves a Black student in Texas. School officials stated his locs were too long and forced him to spend a day in in-school suspension each day he arrived without cutting his hair to the required length.

He and his mother sued the school, the governor, and the attorney general, but the law hadn’t yet gone into effect on the first day of his suspension. While he won the sex discrimination complaint, the CROWN Act complaint didn’t pass as the judge found no evidence that hair length is protected under the discrimination law.

Drew Harvey

After being offered a job with a transportation company, Mr. Harvey relocated from Illinois to Iowa to start orientation. When he arrived, he was instructed that he must cut off his dreadlocks because they were “a safety issue.” He offered to wrap them or trim his hair shorter, but he was told to cut them off or he’d lose his new job. He was fired.

He found photos on social media of truck drivers at that same company who had long hair and filed a discrimination and harassment complaint. The company didn’t respond. It came out that this was the second lawsuit against the company, and the outcome is pending the court hearing.

Davita Key

After alerting her supervisors to her pregnancy, Ms. Key was met with an odd request. She was told that she couldn’t wear her hair in dreadlocks. She offered to wear a hat or change her hairstyle, and the company sent her home. She returned to work the next day wearing a hat, but her supervisor allegedly told her that the Korean owners didn’t want workers wearing dreadlocks. She was fired from her position.

She sued for pregnancy discrimination and racial discrimination based on her hair style. The judge dismissed those two claims while agreeing she’d been retaliated against. A jury awarded her over $800,000.

Jeffrey Thornton

In California’s first CROWN Act lawsuit, an events management company asked their employee to cut his dreadlocks off for a job at a San Diego hotel. He’d been with the company since 2016 and was offered a chance to relocate from Florida to California for the job in 2019 and lost his job when he refused. Until that point, his dreadlocks had never been a problem.

After filing the lawsuit against them, the company said there was a misunderstanding and offered him a job while promising to review grooming policies.

Will the New Administration Impact the CROWN Act?

While some states have acted, the Federal government’s employment and education discrimination and harassment laws have yet to pass anything on a federal level. The Federal CROWN Act passed the House in 2020, but the Senate didn’t pass it. In a second try, it passed the House but the Senate never voted. 

As the current administration has struck down anything related to DEI, it’s unlikely the CROWN Act will head back into the House or Senate for consideration. Even if it does, Republicans haven’t been supportive.

Examples of responses from Republicans after the bill’s last introduction by Democrats was to say, “This bill does not address any of the serious problems our country currently faces.” (Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio) Representative Lauren Boebert (Colorado) went further calling it “the bad hair bill.” Representative Al Green (Texas) called it “a kitchen table issue.”

We hope it does pass on a federal level, but it has passed in California. If you believe you’ve been discriminated against or harassed at school, work, or when applying for or interviewing for a job, talk to Shegerian Conniff. We offer real-world advice where you matter. We’ll help you decide if you have a valid complaint and what steps you should take next.