This may be the case, but the CROWN Act has only passed in the House. It is not federal law yet, so it wouldn’t provide grounds for an appeal in Texas.
Huh, so there is. I’m surprised this happened in Texas - I didn’t bother looking for it because I assumed they wouldn’t be one of the states that had passed it.
This does seem like grounds for an appeal:
Sec. 25.902. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN DISCRIMINATION IN STUDENT DRESS OR GROOMING POLICY. (a) In this section, "protective hairstyle" includes braids, locks, and twists. (b) Any student dress or grooming policy adopted by a school district, including a student dress or grooming policy forany extracurricular activity, may not discriminate against a hair texture or protective hairstyle commonly or historically associated with race.
It’s insane that we even need laws prohibiting discrimination based on hairstyles.
This may be the case, but the CROWN Act has only passed in the House. It is not federal law yet, so it wouldn’t provide grounds for an appeal in Texas.
There is a state law in Texas and many other states.
Huh, so there is. I’m surprised this happened in Texas - I didn’t bother looking for it because I assumed they wouldn’t be one of the states that had passed it.
This does seem like grounds for an appeal:
Sec. 25.902. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN DISCRIMINATION IN STUDENT DRESS OR GROOMING POLICY. (a) In this section, "protective hairstyle" includes braids, locks, and twists.
(b) Any student dress or grooming policy adopted by a school district, including a student dress or grooming policy for any extracurricular activity, may not discriminate against a hair texture or protective hairstyle commonly or historically associated with race.
It’s insane that we even need laws prohibiting discrimination based on hairstyles.