Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: January 6, 2020
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comNew York recently became the second state in the country to ban racial discrimination based on hairstyles. California passed a similar law, known as the Crown Act, in July. Given that other states, including New Jersey, are exploring their own legislation, employers in all states should review their grooming or appearance policies for provisions that limit or otherwise restrict natural hair or hairstyles.
The push to extend anti-discrimination protections to hairstyles can be traced back to New Jersey. In 2018, Andrew Johnson, a high school wrestler from Buena Regional High School, was forced to cut his dreadlocks immediately prior to his scheduled competition. The official gave Johnson 90 seconds to either cut his hair off or forfeit the match. In the wake of the incident, state legislatures have moved to curtail such forms of indirect racial discrimination.
New York’s new law (S.6209A/A.7797A) amends the state’s Human Rights Law and Dignity for All Students Act to specify that discrimination based on race includes hairstyles or traits associated with race. Both laws now include subsections that define race to include “traits historically associated with race, including but not limited to hair texture and protective hairstyles.” The new law defines “protective hairstyles” to include, but not be limited to, such hairstyles as braids, locks, and twists.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed S.6209A/A.7797A into law on July 12, 2019. The provisions took effect immediately. “For much of our nation’s history, people of color – particularly women – have been marginalized and discriminated against simply because of their hairstyle or texture,” Governor Cuomo said. “By signing this bill into law, we are taking an important step toward correcting that history and ensuring people of color are protected from all forms of discrimination.”
In New Jersey, legislation has been introduced that prohibits discrimination on the basis of hair in the workplace, housing, and schools under the state’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD). The provisions are largely modeled after California’s Crown Act and New York’s new law.
The bill (A-5564/S-3945) specifically amends the LAD so that the term “race” includes “traits historically associated with race, including, but not limited to, hair texture, hair type, and protective hairstyles.” Under the bill, the term “protective hairstyles” includes, but is not limited to, hairstyles such as braids, locks, and twists.
“It is a violation of their civil rights to tell you how long your hair should … it has nothing to do with how you perform in the workplace or on a wrestling mat,” said co-sponsor Senator Shirley Turner. The Senate and Assembly Labor Committees are currently considering the legislation.
In light of the New York and California laws (and the prospect of new regulations on the horizon), employers should review their dress, grooming and/or appearance policies to verify that hairstyles, such as afros or dreadlocks, are not prohibited. At the same time, employers should also ensure that seemingly “neutral” policies, such as those that require workers to maintain a “neat and professional appearance,” are not enforced in a way that could be construed as racial discrimination. While claims of discrimination based on hairstyles are relatively rare, the increased regulatory attention on potential hair bias is likely to fuel an uptick in litigation.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, we encourage you to contact us at 201-806-3364 or visit Scarinci Hollenbeck’s Attorneys page to learn more about our attorneys and their legal experience.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Using chattel paper to obtain a security interest in personal property is a powerful tool. It can ensure lenders have a legal claim on collateral ranging from inventory to intellectual property. To reduce risk and protect your legal rights, businesses and lenders should understand the legal framework. This framework governs the creation, sale, and enforcement […]
Author: Dan Brecher
For years, digital assets operated in a legal gray area, a frontier where innovation outpaced the reach of regulators and law enforcement. In this early “Wild West” phase of finance, crypto startups thrived under minimal oversight. That era, however, is coming to an end. The importance of crypto compliance has become paramount as cryptocurrency has […]
Author: Bryce S. Robins
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services vitiating the so-called “background circumstances” test required by half of federal circuit courts.1 The background circumstances test required majority group plaintiffs pleading discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to meet a heightened pleading standard […]
Author: Matthew F. Mimnaugh
Special purpose acquisition companies (better known as SPACs) appear to be making a comeback. SPAC offerings for 2025 have already nearly surpassed last year’s totals, with additional transactions in the pipeline. SPACs last experienced a boom between 2020–2021, with approximately 600 U.S. companies raising a record $163 billion in 2021. Notable companies that went public […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Merging two companies is a complex legal and business transaction. A short form merger, in which an acquiring company merges with a subsidiary corporation, offers a more streamlined process that involves important corporate governance considerations. A short form merger, in which an acquiring company merges with a subsidiary corporation, offers a more streamlined process. However, […]
Author: Dan Brecher
The Trump Administration’s new tariffs are having an oversized impact on small businesses, which already tend to operate on razor thin margins. Many businesses have been forced to raise prices, find new suppliers, lay off staff, and delay growth plans. For businesses facing even more dire financial circumstances, there are additional tariff response options, including […]
Author: Brian D. Spector
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!