• By Paige Duggins-Clay, J.D., Makiah Lyons, J.D., & Tionna Ryan • IDRA Newsletter • February 2025 •
As we observe Black History Month, we call out the need to address ongoing challenges that Black students face in school, including hair discrimination. This form of bias not only undermines students’ cultural identity but also impedes their academic and social-emotional development.
In December, IDRA partnered with a multiracial, intergenerational coalition of advocates to file a friend-of-the-court (amicus) brief urging a Texas appellate court to end a Houston-area school district’s years-long practice of discriminating against Black students wearing racially and culturally significant hairstyles. The brief advocates for Darryl George, a Black Texas high school student who is being unlawfully denied access to public education because of the length of his hair, which he wears in locs.
This month, IDRA also joined partners at the ACLU and several of its affiliates in filing an additional amicus brief in federal court in the George v. Barbers Hill ISD case.
Unfortunately, the George case is part of a long history of discrimination against Black and other historically marginalized students.
The Prevalence and Impact of Hair Discrimination
Hair discrimination manifests when schools enforce grooming policies that penalize Black students for wearing natural hairstyles, such as locs, braids, twists or Afros (Kempf et al., 2024). These policies often reflect Eurocentric beauty standards, deeming traditional Black hairstyles as “unprofessional,” “unruly,” “unkempt” or otherwise inappropriate (Griffin, 2019).
Consequently, Black, Indigenous and other historically marginalized students often face disciplinary actions, social ostracization and psychological distress when schools enforce these policies.
Hair discrimination manifests when schools enforce grooming policies that penalize Black students for wearing natural hairstyles, such as locs, braids, twists or Afros.
The ACLU of Texas recently evaluated the disciplinary records of 50 geographically diverse school districts across Texas for dress and grooming code violations. Students have been forced into in-school suspension or disciplinary alternative education placement for months unless they cut their locs.
Black students faced a hugely disproportionate amount of dress code disciplinary action compared to their share of the overall student population. Black students received 31% of the documented disciplinary instances but only make up 12% of the surveyed student population. White students in the same districts make up 25% of the student population but only 13% of disciplinary instances (Kempf et al., 2024).
Studies suggest this trend of over-disciplining Black students stems from systemic bias in schools and educators’ implicit biases and racial stereotypes of students (Kempf et al., 2024).
Hair Discrimination’s Racist Roots
Often implemented in the name of “conformity,” school dress and grooming policies tend to be disproportionately enforced against Black students and require them to adopt hairstyles that do not reflect their racial, spiritual or cultural heritage.
For example, in the Barbers Hill Independent School District (a small suburban district located outside of Houston), school leaders have punished at least three Black students for wearing their hair in long locs: De’Andre Arnold, Kaden Bradford and Darryl George. District leaders have sought to justify their actions by suggesting that “Being American requires conformity” (Dellinger, 2023).
Efforts to “cleanse,” “control” and “conform” the bodies of Black, Mexican and Indigenous peoples are inextricably intertwined with the history of slavery and colonization.
Efforts to “cleanse,” “control” and “conform” the bodies of Black, Mexican and Indigenous peoples are inextricably intertwined with the history of slavery and colonization.
When white European colonizers forcibly enslaved African people during the transatlantic slave trade, they shaved their heads in an attempt to destroy their connection to their homeland and the cultural and spiritual strength they derived from their hair: “the first step the Europeans took to erase the slave’s culture and alter the relationship between the Africans and their hair” (Byrd & Tharps, 2002).
Slave owners often used hair shaving or cropping as punishment for enslaved people because they recognized the readily apparent spiritual and cultural significance of enslaved Africans’ ability to grow and style their hair.
For example, 18th-century advertisements for “runaway slaves” described “the young slave Hannah,” who had her hair “lately cut in a very irregular manner, as a Punishment for Offences” and “Peter, a frequent runaway,” who had “been branded ‘S on the cheek, and R on the other,’ and had had his hair cut entirely off” (White & White, 1995).
Because African hair was also deemed unattractive and inferior to the Eurocentric standard of “long straight hair,” enslaved women who worked in the fields were often required to cover their hair in headscarves (Griffin, 2019). Some enslaved women who worked inside the house, however, had to mimic the hairstyles of their enslavers, forced to either straighten their hair or wear wigs that emulated their enslavers.
Even free Black people were not exempt from the demands of the white ruling class to conform to Eurocentric standards. Political leaders in antebellum Louisiana legally required “free women of color” to wear a “tignon, a kerchief which bound the hair” (Everett, 1966).
White people often referred to African hair derogatorily as “wool” and locs as “dreadful,” which some historians believe led to the name “dreadlocks” (Simone Mallory, 2020; Williams, 2018).
After the abolition of slavery, newly freed Black people sought to become full citizens in society. One way of achieving this goal was to emulate Eurocentric aesthetics, distancing themselves from the racist and dehumanizing stereotypes associated with “savage Negro[es],” with large lips, wide noses and kinky hair (Byrd & Tharps, 2002).
During this period, Black men who allowed their hair and beard to grow long, like Frederick Douglass, were considered “uppity,” having boldly stepped out of their designated social place.
In the Jim Crow era, Black features continued to be demonized and dehumanized, including in advertisements that often portrayed African Americans as “nappy-haired caricatures” with exaggerated features (Bennett-Alexander & Harrison, 2016).
Indeed, there is some evidence that the term “Jim Crow” refers to a hair styling implement used by enslaved Africans to comb their hair to their white master’s satisfaction. Jacob Stroyer, a formerly enslaved man who the Federal Writer’s Project interviewed in the 1930s, described how “before each inspection of the slave children by the plantation owner and his wife, attempts were made ‘to straighten out our unruly wools with some small cards, or Jim-crows,’ as they were called” (White & White, 1995).
As a result of these discriminatory societal expectations, a booming beauty industry emerged to help Black men and women alter their natural hair texture with chemical treatments and hot combs (Hamilton, 2021). Many Black men and women chose, or were required by their employers, to apply chemical relaxers to straighten their natural hair texture. Black school children were similarly required or pressured to do the same.
Movements for Natural Hair Acceptance Across Time
During the Civil Rights Movement, Black political leaders, such as Martin Luther King, Jr., made a deliberate choice to wear short haircuts, keeping their natural hair close and tight to their heads (Suggs, 2021).
For men especially, short, neat natural hair was an “acceptable” hairstyle, whereas the longer Afro styles starting to come into vogue as symbols of racial pride, self-acceptance and agency were considered inflammatory.
For women, longer hair was preferable because it was “feminine,” but only if straightened. Having long, naturally textured hair was taboo and discouraged, regardless of gender, because it was a blatant, visible symbol of the wearer’s heritage.
The Black Power Movement of the 1960s and 1970s gained traction alongside the “Black is Beautiful” campaign, encouraging Black men and women to wear Afros and other culturally significant hairstyles, like braids, to counter popular stereotypes of Black hair and people as ugly, undesirable and unkempt (Owens Patton, 2006).
During the 1970s, the United States also experienced a growth in Caribbean immigration. Jamaican cultural influence, in particular, gained popularity in no small part due to the spread of Reggae music, increasing the visibility of the Rastafari and the often long-locked hairstyle closely associated with Rastafarianism and wider Caribbean culture.
However, these cultural and social movements eroded in the late 1970s and early 1980s, as notions of assimilation into newly integrated workplaces and schools became more dominant, and Black people opted for more “acceptable” straight or chemically processed hairstyles less associated with Black identity, racial pride or political messaging (Owens Patton, 2006).
Through the 1990s and early 2000s, Black men who sported longer natural hairstyles like Afros, cornrows, braids and locs, were frequently stereotyped as “thuglike” – a particularly harmful and racially-charged assumption (Childs, 2019).
Influenced by earlier movements, the natural hair movement of the early 2000s pushed for greater mainstream acceptance of natural hair and hairstyles – this time also out of concern that chemical relaxers contribute to various cancers and other adverse health effects and that chemical and heat-based straighteners damage the hair and scalp.
Protective styling reemerged as Black people once again embraced their cultural aesthetic, in addition to the utility of such styles to aid in the maintenance of healthy natural hair and prevent breakage.
States and Schools Must Adopt and Abide by Policies Ending Hair Discrimination in Schools
Despite the progress achieved by Black activists, most protective styles – like twists, locs, braids and sew-in extensions – persist as targets of discrimination, particularly in employment and educational settings (Greene, 2021).
Even decades after the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, schools, employers and other institutions continue to implement “race-neutral” appearance and grooming policies that disproportionately affect Black people and perpetuate racial discrimination.
This was the very political and social climate that necessitated the national CROWN coalition in 2019 to draft the CROWN Act to ensure protection against discrimination based on race-based hairstyle, including hair texture and protective styles, such as braids, locs, twists and knots (CROWN Coalition, 2024). IDRA successfully advocated and testified for passage of the Texas CROWN Act in 2023.
Honoring Black History Through Action
To eradicate hair discrimination in schools and foster inclusive environments, policymakers and school leaders can do the following.
Implement comprehensive anti-discrimination policies: School districts should adopt clear policies that explicitly prohibit discrimination based on hair texture and hairstyles associated with racial, cultural or religious identities.
Provide cultural competency training: Educators and administrators should receive training to understand the cultural significance of various hairstyles and recognize implicit biases that may influence their perceptions and actions.
Engage with affected communities: Schools should collaborate with students, family members, and community leaders from marginalized groups to ensure that grooming policies are inclusive and respectful of cultural expressions.
Enforce existing legislation: The courts and state education agencies must ensure compliance with laws like the Texas CROWN Act, holding schools accountable for discriminatory practices.
Black History Month serves as a reminder of the resilience and contributions of Black individuals throughout history. Addressing hair discrimination is a tangible way to honor this legacy by ensuring that Black students can express their cultural identity without fear of prejudice or punishment.
By implementing inclusive policies and practices, we can ensure all students are respected and empowered to succeed.
References
Bennett-Alexander, D.D., & Harrison, L.F. (2016). My Hair Is Not Like Yours: Workplace Hair Grooming Policies for African American Women as Racial Stereotyping in Violation of Title VII. Cardozo Journal of Law & Gender. https://works.bepress.com/linda_harrison/1/download/
Byrd, A., & Tharps, L. (2002). Hair Story: Untangling The Roots of Black Hair in America.
Childs, M. (2019). Who Told You Your Hair Was Nappy?: A Proposal for Replacing an Ineffective Standard for Determining Racially Discriminatory Employment Practices. Michigan State Law Review.
CROWN Coalition. (2024). Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair: The Official Campaign of the CROWN Act. https://www.thecrownact.com/
Everett, D.E. (Winter 1966). Free Persons of Color in Colonial Louisiana. Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4230881
Greene, W.D. (Fall 2021). Title VII: What’s Hair (and Other Race-Based Characteristics) Got to Do with It? University of Colorado Law Review. https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1091&context=lawreview
Griffin, C. (July 3, 2019). How Natural Black Hair at Work Became a Civil Rights Issue, JSTOR Daily. https://daily.jstor.org/how-natural-black-hair-at-work-became-a-civil-rights-issue/
Hamilton, A. (February 2021). Untangling Discrimination: The CROWN Act and Protecting Black Hair. University of Cincinnati Law Review. https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/uclr/article/1388/&path_info=07HamiltonPUBLISHING.pdf
Henderson, H., & Bourgeois, J.W. (February 23, 2021). Penalizing Black Hair in the Name of Academic Success Is Undeniably Racist, Unfounded, and Against the Law. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/penalizing-black-hair-in-the-name-of-academic-success-is-undeniably-racist-unfounded-and-against-the-law/
IDRA. (December 5, 2024). Black, Native American and Civil Rights Advocates Urge Texas Court to End Hair Discrimination in Texas Schools – IDRA and Allies File Amicus Brief Supporting Students Deprived of Education Due to Hair Length. https://www.idra.org/resource-center/black-native-american-and-civil-rights-advocates-urge-texas-court-to-end-hair-discrimination-in-texas-schools/
Kempf, C., Klosterboer, B., Achar, C., Maldonado, S., Hall, A., & Huerta, D. (2024). Dressed to Express: How Dress Codes Discriminate Against Texas Students and Must be Changed. ACLU of Texas. https://www.aclutx.org/sites/default/files/dresscodereport_2-1-24.pdf
Owens Patton, T. (Summer 2006). Hey Girl, Am I More than My Hair?: African American Women and Their Struggles with Beauty, Body Image, and Hair. NWSA Journal. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4317206
Salhotra, P., & Serrano, A. (February 22, 2024). A Texas school has punished a Black student over his hairstyle for months. Neither side is backing down. Texas Tribune. https://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/22/texas-crown-act-barbers-hill-lawsuit/
Simone Mallory, M. (May 2020). When the Sun of Cultural Beauty Rises, the Competent Mind Remains Resilient!” The Journey of Title VII and the Story of Natural Hair. Southern University Law Review. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3570709
Suggs, E. (February 23, 2021). For many, an Afro isn’t just a hairstyle. Atlanta Journal-Constitution. https://www.ajc.com/life/for-many-an-afro-isnt-just-a-hairstyle/7RKTQOXTMFAZ7GFAO7NBV7D74Y/
Texas House Commmittee on State Affairs. (2023). Bill Analysis, Tex. H.B. 567, 88th Leg., R.S.
White, S., & White, G. (February 1995). Slave Hair and African American Culture in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. The Journal of Southern History. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2211360
Williams, A. (2018). My Hair is Professional Too!: A Case Study and Overview of Laws Pertaining to Workplace Grooming Standards and Hairstyles Akin to African Culture. Southern Journal of Policy and Justice.
Paige Duggins-Clay, J.D., is IDRA’s chief legal analyst. Comments and questions may be directed to her via email at paige.duggins-clay@idra.org. Makiah Lyons, J.D., is an Equal Justice Works Fellow hosted by IDRA. Comments and questions may be directed to her via email at makiah.lyons@idra.org. Tionna Ryan was an IDRA legal intern in the fall of 2024.
[© 2025, IDRA. This article originally appeared in the February edition of the IDRA Newsletter. Permission to reproduce this article is granted provided the article is reprinted in its entirety and proper credit is given to IDRA and the author.]
Recent Podcasts 