Much of the world watched in disgust and dismay as a referee, on the sidelines of an ongoing wrestling tournament, sternly and with complete disregard for the student, hacked away at a young student’s dreadlocks as a condition precedent for the young man to finish competing in a high school wrestling match. A child was required to choose between his cultural roots and a wrestling competition. Months earlier, a Black BP executive alleged that she was fired from her job after she wore her hair in braids to work. And recently, in Texas, a young male student was threatened with expulsion after he refused to cut his hair. Unfortunately, these are only a few examples in the laundry list of illustrations which demonstrate the ways in which American culture punishes Black Americans who do not conform with its one-sided standard of beauty. Despite the push by companies for diversity in hiring efforts, it remains apparent that many of these spaces want diversity in number, but nothing more. What must be understood, however, is that with diversity in applicants, so too comes diversity in appearance, diversity in attire, and diversity in hairstyles.

While companies are less likely to exhibit the overt discrimination that they did 40 years ago, modern-day racial discrimination is often much more subtle and can, sometimes, be harder to detect. Words like “professional,” “neat,” and “polished” have replaced a company’s outright refusal to hire Black men and women and are now used to discriminate against Black women and men who have begun to embrace the natural texture of their hair. A Black woman’s textured afro, seen by her as her crowning glory, is seen by many in corporate America as a threat to their image. Similarly, a Black man’s decision to allow his hair to naturally grow into dreadlocks makes many see him as allegedly less approachable and more combatant. However, in an attempt to stop these biases about Black hair from creeping into hiring decisions (or lack thereof), state legislators have stepped in to protect their constituents and the future of the young Black boys and girls that these biases are affecting.

California became the first state to ban natural hair discrimination. The CROWN Act, which stands for “Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair” was signed into law on July 3, 2019 and prohibits employers, as well as public schools, from banning natural black hairstyles, including braids, cornrows, and dreadlocks. The hairstyles do not alter the natural hair texture, as such, many liken the styles to being synonymous with a “racial trait.”

On the heels of California’s triumphant ban, across the coast, New York and New Jersey passed their own version of the CROWN Act. To date, 14 states, including Illinois, have passed similar laws, but there are still 36 states left to join this movement. One can only hope that the rest of the country will follow suit and the long history of racial discrimination on the basis of hairstyle will soon be a thing of the past. Our children are watching us, and the discrimination that has been allowed to take place inside the workspace, is seeping into our school systems. The CROWN Act is just the tip of the iceberg, but the advocates on the ground and behind the scenes will not allow it to be the end.

For additional information concerning the CROWN Act and to sign a petition for your state, visit www.thecrownact.com.

This article was previously published in the Kane County Bar Association’s Bar Briefs, September/October 2020. Information on the states passing CROWN Act legislation has been updated.

Janelle Dixon is a senior associate at KSN and focuses her practice on the representation of community associations (condominium, townhome, homeowner, Master) in the defense and prosecution of lawsuits ranging from breach of fiduciary duty, discrimination, breach of contract, and personal injury claims. She has served three terms as co-chair for the Kane County Bar Association Diversity Committee.