This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Prohibits discrimination based on hair texture or hairstyles when those traits are commonly associated with a particular race or national origin, and folds that prohibition into existing federal civil-rights laws. The bill extends explicit protections against hairstyle- and texture-based discrimination across federally funded programs, housing, public accommodations, employment, and under 42 U.S.C. §1981, using the same enforcement mechanisms, remedies, and jurisdiction as the underlying civil-rights statutes.
The bill extends explicit federal protections and enforcement avenues against discrimination for race-associated hairstyles—improving access to education, employment, housing, and services for Black and other affected people—while imposing greater compliance, litigation, and administrative burdens on employers, schools, landlords, and government bodies.
Students, workers, tenants, and patrons who are Black or have race-associated textured or protective hairstyles (e.g., locs, braids, Afros, twists) gain explicit federal protection from discrimination across education, employment, housing, and public accommodations.
Victims of hairstyle-based discrimination obtain access to federal enforcement and remedies under existing civil-rights statutes (Title VII, Title VI, the Fair Housing Act, Title II, and 42 U.S.C. §1981), including private suits, HUD/DOJ remedies, damages, and injunctions.
Students are protected from exclusion, discipline, or suspension for wearing protected hairstyles, reducing educational disruption and improving school inclusion and advancement.
Employers, schools, landlords, and small businesses will face increased litigation risk and compliance costs (policy revisions, training, legal defense, and potential damages) as hairstyle-based protections are expanded and enforced.
Federal agencies and courts may experience higher administrative burdens and caseloads as more disputes use federal enforcement pathways, increasing government costs and judicial workload.
Safety-sensitive employers could face uncertainty and litigation when asserting narrow safety or bona fide occupational exceptions, potentially complicating workplace safety rules and operations.
Introduced February 26, 2025 by Bonnie Watson Coleman · Last progress February 26, 2025