Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

In Defense of the Crown Act

  • Published:
Philosophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The CROWN Act is a recent piece of legislation adopted in 19 states and a handful of counties that prohibits race-based hair discrimination, which is the denial of employment and educational opportunities from individuals with kinky or curly hair textures or associated hairstyles. I contend, however, that in spite of the political and popular momentum, politician and activists need stronger and more compelling arguments in order to attain broader legislative support. I will provide some of these supporting arguments here, asserting that the CROWN Act represents a profound legal, political, and moral advancement in our understanding of discrimination generally, and American racism in particular. Importantly, in amending the definition of “race” to include some mutable characteristics, the CROWN Act clarifies what counts as evidence of racial discrimination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In this article, I will refer to the hairstyle of matted kinky hair as ‘locs,’ a more literal description of the mechanism of formation. In other words, once tightly curled hair is styled in this way, in most cases it cannot be un-styled; it can only be cut off. The hair almost literally becomes ‘locked.’ The common alternative terms, ‘dreadlocks’ or ‘dreads,’ were born from the stigmatizing cultural practice of characterizing those who styled their hair in this way as literally ‘dreaded.’ For more on this history, see, Byrd and Tharps (2002).

  2. Dominique Hobdy, “Florida School Threatens to Expel African-American Girl for Wearing Natural Hair,” Essence.Com, November 26, 2013, http://www.essence.com/2013/11/26/florida-school-threatens-expel-africanamerican-girl-wearing-natural-hair.

  3. Ella Cerón, “A School Reportedly Told This 17-Year-Old Her Natural Hair Was a ‘Distraction,’” Teen Vogue, May 21, 2017, https://www.teenvogue.com/story/florida-teen-told-natural-hair-was-a-distraction-by-schoolassistant-principal; “NFCS 2016-2017 Student Handbook” (Tallahassee, FL: North Florida Christian School, 2016), 42.

  4. Associated Press, “‘Cruel, Racist’: Anger over High School Wrestler Forced to Cut His Dreadlocks,” The Guardian, December 22, 2018, sec. Sport, https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/dec/22/high-school-wrestler-dreadlocks-hair-cut-video-racism.

  5. Associated Press, “Referee Who Forced Wrestler to Cut Dreadlocks Banned for Two Years,” The Guardian, September 18, 2019, sec. Sport, https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/18/wrestling-referee-dreadlocks-suspended-alan-maloney.

  6. “PISD 2019–2020 Handbook” (Pearland, TX: Pearland Independant School District, 2019), 86; Elisha Fieldstadt, “Texas School Staffers Colored in Black Teen’s Haircut with a Sharpie, Lawsuit Claims,” NBC News, August 19, 2019, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-school-staffers-colored-black-teen-s-haircut-sharpie-lawsuit-n1043956.

  7. “BHISD 2019–2020 Student Handbook” (Mont Belvieu, TX: Barbers Hill Independant School Distric, 2019), 54–55.

  8. Arnold v. Barbers Hill Independent School Dist., 479 F. Supp. 3d 511 (Dist. Court 2020); “After 2 Black Students Were Suspended, Court Rules Hair Policy Is Discriminatory,” ABC13 Houston, August 18, 2020, https://abc13.com/deandre-arnold-dreadlocks-barbers-hill-high-school-hair/6376156/.

  9. “Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia” (Washington, DC: Department of the Army, February 3, 2005), 4.

  10. “Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia” (Washington, DC: Department of the Army, May 25, 2017), 6.

  11. Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mut. Hospital Ins., Inc., 538 F. 2d 164 (Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 1976); Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Ins., Inc., 522 F. 2d 1235 (Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 1975).

  12. Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mut. Hospital Ins., Inc., 538 F. 2d at 167.

  13. Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mut. Hospital Ins., Inc., 538 F. 2d at 165.

  14. Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Ins., Inc., 522 F. 2d at 1241.

  15. Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mut. Hospital Ins., Inc., 538 F. 2d at 168.

  16. Rogers v. American Airlines, Inc., 527 F. Supp. 229 (Dist. Court 1981).

  17. Rogers v. American Airlines, Inc., 527 F. Supp. at 231.

  18. Rogers v. American Airlines, Inc., 527 F. Supp. at 231.

  19. Rogers v. American Airlines, Inc., 527 F. Supp. at 232.

  20. Rogers v. American Airlines, Inc., 527 F. Supp. at 232; emphasis added.

  21. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d 1018 (Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit 2016); EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d 1139 (Dist. Court 2014).

  22. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1021.

  23. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1022.

  24. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 US 792 (Supreme Court 1973).

  25. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 US at 802.

  26. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d at 1143.

  27. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d at 1143.

  28. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d at 1144.

  29. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d at 1144.

  30. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1023–24.

  31. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d at 1143.

  32. Butler was appointed by President Regan, Adalberto and Carnes both by President Obama, and Robreño by President Bush Sr.

  33. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1035, fn3.

  34. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1033.

  35. Garcia v. Gloor, 618 F. 2d 264 (Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 1980).

  36. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1034.

  37. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d at 1143.

  38. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1030.

  39. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d at 1144.

  40. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1025.

  41. EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d at 1035 fn2.

  42. Booker, CROWN Act of 2021, Sec 2(c).

  43. Mitchell, SB-188 Discrimination: hairstyles., Sec1 (e).

  44. Mercer, “Black Hair/Style Politics,” 44.

  45. Booker, CROWN Act of 2021, Sec2 (a)1–2.

  46. Booker, CROWN Act of 2021, Sec2 (a)9.

  47. see Booker, CROWN Act of 2021, Sec3a, Sec4a, Sec5a, Sec6a, Sec7a.

  48. Mitchell, SB-188 Discrimination: hairstyles., Sec1 d&g.

  49. Hoffman, “The Importance of Immutability in Employment Discrimination Law,” 1538.

  50. Ford, “Bias in the Air,” 1418; see also, Clarke (2016).

  51. Hoffman, “The Importance of Immutability in Employment Discrimination Law,” 1540.

  52. Hoffman, “The Importance of Immutability in Employment Discrimination Law,” 1540.

  53. On the logical preclusion of “mixed race” see Zack (1995).

  54. Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 US 537 (Supreme Court 210AD).

  55. see Ford, Racial Culture, 100.

  56. Ford, Racial Culture, 197.

  57. Ford, Racial Culture, 100.

  58. Ford, “Bias in the Air,” 1419.

  59. Ford, “Bias in the Air,” 1416.

  60. Ford, Racial Culture, 100.

  61. Jaima, “American Ignorance and the Discourse of Manageability Concerning the Care and Presentation of Black Hair,” 284; emphasis in original.

References

  • ABC13 Houston. “After 2 Black Students Were Suspended, Court Rules Hair Policy Is Discriminatory,” August 18, 2020. https://abc13.com/deandre-arnold-dreadlocks-barbers-hill-high-school-hair/6376156/

  • Alcoff, L. M. (2015). The Future of Whiteness (1st ed.). Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold v. Barbers Hill Independent School Dist., 479 F. Supp. 3d 511 (Dist. Court 2020).

  • BHISD 2019–2020 Student Handbook. Mont Belvieu, TX: Barbers Hill Independant School Distric, 2019.

  • Booker, C. (2021). CROWN Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. S.188.

  • Bracey, G. E., & Moore, W. L. (2017). ‘Race tests’: Racial boundary maintenance in white evangelical churches. Sociological Inquiry, 87(2), 282–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridges, K. M. (2013). The dangerous law of biological race. Fordham Law Review, 82(1), 21–80.

  • Brodkin, K. (1998). How Jews Became White Folks and What That Says about Race in America. Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrd, A., & Tharps, L. (2002). Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America. St. Martin’s Griffin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerón, E. “A School Reportedly Told This 17-Year-Old Her Natural Hair Was a ‘Distraction.’” Teen Vogue, May 21, 2017. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/florida-teen-told-natural-hair-was-a-distraction-by-school-assistant-principal

  • Clarke, J. A. (2015). Against immutability. Yale Law Journal, 125(1), 2–103.

  • Dickey, A. (2003). Hair Rules!: The Ultimate Hair-Care Guide for Women with Kinky, Curly, or Wavy Hair (1st ed.). Villard.

    Google Scholar 

  • EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 11 F. Supp. 3d 1139 (Dist. Court 2014).

  • EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, 852 F. 3d 1018 (Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit 2016).

  • Fieldstadt, E. Texas School Staffers Colored in Black Teen’s Haircut with a Sharpie, Lawsuit Claims. NBC News, August 19, 2019. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-school-staffers-colored-black-teen-s-haircut-sharpie-lawsuit-n1043956

  • Ford, R. T. (2006). Racial Culture: A Critique. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, R. T. (2014). Bias in the air: Rethinking employment discrimination law symposium: The civil rights act at fifty: Essay. Stanford Law Review, 66(6), 1381–1422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia v. Gloor, 618 F. 2d 264 (Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 1980).

  • Greene, D. W. (2016). Splitting hairs: The eleventh circuit’s take on workplace bans against black women’s natural hair in EEOC v. Catastrophe management solutions. University of Miami Law Review, 71(4), 987–1036.

  • Hobdy, D. Florida School Threatens to Expel African-American Girl for Wearing Natural Hair. Essence.Com, November 26, 2013. http://www.essence.com/2013/11/26/florida-school-threatens-expel-african-american-girl-wearing-natural-hair

  • Hoffman, S. (2010). The importance of immutability in employment discrimination law. William and Mary Law Review, 52(5), 1483–1546.

  • Ignatiev, N. (2009). How the Irish Became White. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaima, A. R. A. (2022). American ignorance and the discourse of manageability concerning the care and presentation of black hair. Journal of Medical Humanities, 43(2), 283–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-020-09663-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mut. Hospital Ins., Inc., 538 F. 2d 164 (Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 1976).

  • Jenkins v. Blue Cross Mutual Hospital Ins., Inc., 522 F. 2d 1235 (Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 1975).

  • JOY Collective. (2019). The CROWN Research Study. Dove.

  • JOY Collective and Modulize. (2023). CROWN 2023 Workplace Research Study. Dove.

  • Lopez, I. F. H. (1994). The social construction of race: Some observations on illusion, fabrication, and choice. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 29(1), 1–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 US 792 (Supreme Court 1973).

  • Mercer, K. (1987). Black hair/style politics. New Formations, 3, 33–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, H. (2019). SB-188 Discrimination: hairstyles., Pub. L. No. SB-188. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB188. Accessed 28 Mar 2021

  • NFCS. (2016). 2016–2017 Student Handbook. Tallahassee, FL: North Florida Christian School.

  • Objection to Bill S.888: Senate Hearing, 117th Congress. Washington, DC: C-SPAN.org, December 14, 2022. https://www.c-span.org/video/?524823-1/senate-session

  • Painter, N. I. (2011). The History of White People. Reprint edition. W. W. Norton & Company.

  • PISD. (2019). 2019–2020 Handbook. Pearland, TX: Pearland Independant School District.

  • Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 US 537 (Supreme Court 210AD).

  • Press, Associated. “‘Cruel, Racist’: Anger over High School Wrestler Forced to Cut His Dreadlocks.” The Guardian, December 22, 2018, sec. Sport. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/dec/22/high-school-wrestler-dreadlocks-hair-cut-video-racism

  • Press, Associated. “Referee Who Forced Wrestler to Cut Dreadlocks Banned for Two Years.” The Guardian, September 18, 2019, sec. Sport. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/18/wrestling-referee-dreadlocks-suspended-alan-maloney

  • Rogers v. American Airlines, Inc., 527 F. Supp. 229 (Dist. Court 1981).

  • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (2012).

  • Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia. Washington, DC: Department of the Army, February 3, 2005.

  • Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia. Washington, DC: Department of the Army, May 25, 2017.

  • Willingham v. Macon Telegraph Publishing Co., 507 F. 2d 1084 (Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 1975).

  • Zack, N. (1995). Mixed black and white race and public policy. Hypatia, 10(1), 120–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1995.tb01356.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    Amir Jaima

Authors
  1. Amir Jaima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amir Jaima.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

The author(s) declare(s) that they have no conflict(s) of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jaima, A. In Defense of the Crown Act. Philosophia 51, 1977–1992 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-023-00648-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-023-00648-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation