U.S. House passes CROWN Act barring bias based on hair

The U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill Friday that seeks to protect Americans from discrimination based on the texture and style of their hair.

The CROWN Act, led by a cohort of Black women lawmakers including U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., mirrors measures that have already become law in more than a dozen states. The federal bill, which has the support of President Joe Biden, was passed largely along party lines after many Republicans derailed a vote last month.

Minnesota’s delegation split in similar fashion, with Democrats voting in favor of the bill and Republicans voting against it.

In an interview Friday, Omar said she hopes the CROWN Act has a path forward in the Senate but wasn’t yet sure about its chances this year.

“I think it’s straightforward,” she said. “I don’t know anyone that could oppose simple legislation that is just trying to make sure that there is protection for women and young girls who are mostly Black in this country.”

Republican U.S. Reps. Michelle Fischbach, Tom Emmer and Pete Stauber were not available or did not respond to requests for comment Friday.

The CROWN Act would prohibit discrimination based on hair texture and protective hairstyles — such as locs, cornrows, braids, twists, Bantu knots and Afros — and treat it the same as race or national origin discrimination under federal civil rights laws.

A nationwide survey by CROWN Act proponents in 2019 found Black women are 1-1/2 times more likely than white women to be sent home from work because of their hair.

During more than an hour of debate Friday morning, Republican lawmakers argued that the CROWN Act — which stands for Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair — should not be a congressional priority.

“How about a world where gas prices aren’t $5 a gallon? How about a world where you can actually walk safely on your streets and not have record levels of crime? How about a world where inflation isn’t at a 40-year high? How about a world where we were actually energy independent?” said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio. “Those are the issues we should be focused on.”

Rep. Dan Bishop, R-N.C., called the legislation “another solution to a problem that doesn’t exist in any significant scope in this country” and said it would prevent employers from enforcing workplace health and safety rules.

Democrats countered with specific examples, from the classroom to the workplace, of discrimination based on hair — including, for some, experiences of their own.

“I know personally, as a person with my hair, that I have had people tell my employer that I was an embarrassment sitting in the front office because of the way my hair looked,” said Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis.

Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., called Republicans’ arguments “outrageous” but “not surprising.”

“Republicans, every step of the way, try to diminish the humanity of Black and brown people, try to uphold white supremacy at every step of the way,” Lee said. “Just listen to what you’re saying in terms of arguing against this bill.”

A Minnesota version of the CROWN Act is in a similar place. The House on Feb. 28 passed a bill adding a definition of race that includes natural hairstyles and textures to the state Human Rights Act. Though the measure received bipartisan support, it remains to be seen whether the GOP-controlled Senate will follow suit.

Even if the law passes at the federal level, it will still be important for state-level legislation to move forward, Omar said. “I don’t think it weakens the work that we are doing — I think it strengthens it,” she said.

Staff writer Hunter Woodall contributed to this report.