Massachusetts Enacts CROWN Act Banning Discrimination Based on Natural or Protective Hairstyles

Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker on July 26, 2022, signed into law the Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair Act (CROWN Act), prohibiting discrimination against employees, students and other individuals based on their natural or protective hairstyle.

The law was inspired by twin sisters who were disciplined by their charter high school in 2017 for wearing their hair in braids with long extensions, which school administrators said violated school policy. Supporters of the law have advocated that Black women in particular have faced pressure, both in school and the workplace, to alter their hair to conform to expectations that are unwelcoming of their natural or protective hairstyles, or even formal policies that prohibit or restrict their natural or protective hairstyles.

By enacting the CROWN Act, Massachusetts joins 17 other states that have enacted similar protections in the last few years, and similar legislation is being considered at the federal level as well. The laws are generally intended to protect against discrimination based on hairstyles that are historically associated with someone's race. Previously, employees and other individuals who believed that they were denied employment or otherwise discriminated against based on their hairstyle had difficulty establishing that the decision or action was based on a protected category under law, even if their hairstyle may have been commonly associated with a particular race.

The CROWN Act adds "natural or protective hairstyle" to the enumerated list of protected categories in a number of existing Massachusetts state laws. A "natural or protective hairstyle," as used in the law, means "hair texture" and "hair type," in addition to "hairstyles, which shall include, but not be limited to, natural or protective hairstyles such as braids, locks, twists, Bantu knots and other formations." The laws modified to bar discrimination based on natural or protective hairstyle include those prohibiting discrimination in employment, housing and lending (M.G.L. c. 151B, § 4), in public school enrollment (M.G.L. c. 76, § 5), in school bullying and prevention plans (M.G.L. c. 71, § 370), in charter schools (M.G.L. c. 71, § 89), and in places of public accommodation, such as restaurants, stores and hotels (M.G.L. c. 272, § 92A). The law expressly prohibits any Massachusetts school district, school committee, public school and nonsectarian school from adopting or implementing any policy or code that impairs or prohibits natural or protective hairstyles.

Conclusion and Takeaways

The law authorizes the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) to provide written guidance, and the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) to promulgate rules, regulations, policies and recommendations interpreting and enforcing the new provision. But it remains to be seen how broadly the DESE, MCAD and courts will construe the protection. It may take some time before agencies offer any formal guidance to employers, schools and others seeking to comply with the new law.

In the meantime, employers and schools should review and update their equal employment opportunity (EEO) and nondiscrimination policies to include the new protected class, examine hiring and screening practices, and consider whether any changes are needed to uniform, dress code or appearance policies. Employers are advised to provide training to managerial employees, teachers in education settings and staff regarding the new law, focusing on not making any hiring, disciplinary or other decisions based on an employee's, applicant's or student's hairstyle.

For more information on this topic, please contact the authors or your Holland & Knight attorney.

Information contained in this alert is for the general education and knowledge of our readers. It is not designed to be, and should not be used as, the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a legal problem, and it should not be substituted for legal advice, which relies on a specific factual analysis. Moreover, the laws of each jurisdiction are different and are constantly changing. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, we urge you to consult the authors of this publication, your Holland & Knight representative or other competent legal counsel.