Students reflect on CROWN Act not passing the House

The Crown Act, a bill meant to prevent the discrimination of one’s hair, failed to pass the House of Representatives Monday. Credit: Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via TNS

Shanelle White, a second-year in psychology and a member of Natural and Prosperous Society at Ohio State, said people of color have to worry about how they will be viewed in the workplace and daily life. 

The Creating a Respectful and Open World For Natural Hair Act, known as the CROWN Act, would protect people whose hair texture is historically connected to their race from discrimination. It was introduced March 19, 2021, and needed at least 290 votes to pass the House but received only 235 when voted on Feb. 28, with all the 188 nay votes coming from Republican representatives.

White said government officials who are not of color would not understand the importance of the CROWN Act.

“No white person has to worry about going into the workplace and then their hair being deemed unprofessional,” White said.

The bill stated  employers would not be allowed to treat employees or candidates differently based on biases or attitudes related to someone’s hair texture, according to the U.S. Congress website.

White said she did not have to deal with much discrimination for her hair because she worked in spaces with other Black people. She said the law protects people, especially women of color, in areas beyond employment.

“[The bill] not being passed definitely affects what my employer can say about my hair, and it affects the types of jobs that I will be able to work in, and it also affects how I might see myself,” White said.

Harrison Siders, a second-year in political science and president of College Republicans at Ohio State, said hair texture discrimination needs to be protected against. But, he said it should already be protected under the federal civil rights law.

Siders said the bill should protect groups who historically face discrimination because of their hair. However, he said the bill does not accomplish this goal.

“The ultimate effect of the bill would be to federally protect any hairstyle you find a historical justification for, for a person of any race,” Siders said. “This is not what the bill is reporting to be.”

Siders said he believes it is a complicated issue because although anti-discrimination laws are necessary, the CROWN Act should be narrowed to focus on those with natural hair.

White said her hair is part of who she is and does not want that to limit her when going into the workforce.

“The same hair that grows out of my head grows out of another white person’s hair, it’s just that it’s different textures,” White said.