What is the CROWN Act’s main goal?

Roots

To stand at the threshold of the CROWN Act is to confront not merely a piece of legislation, but a living echo of ancestral defiance and enduring beauty. It is to acknowledge the strands that bind us to epochs past, to the wisdom held within each coil and kink, and to the silent stories whispered through generations of textured hair. When we ask about the CROWN Act’s central aim, we are truly inquiring about the restoration of dignity, the reclamation of identity, and the formal recognition of a heritage that has too long been dismissed, demeaned, or denied. It is a legal affirmation that the diverse manifestations of Black and mixed-race hair are not deviations from a norm, but expressions of selfhood, history, and profound cultural memory.

For centuries, hair has served as a profound marker of identity, status, and community across African civilizations. From the intricate cornrows that could convey marital status or tribal affiliation, to the meticulously styled locs signifying spiritual devotion or age, hair was a language unto itself, a living archive of a person’s journey and their place within the collective. These practices were not superficial adornments; they were integral to social cohesion, spiritual connection, and the transmission of knowledge. The act of styling hair was often a communal ritual, a moment of bonding and shared tradition, particularly among women.

The Anatomy of Ancestral Expression

The very structure of textured hair, with its unique elliptical follicle shape and varied curl patterns, contributes to its distinct qualities, from tight coils to gentle waves. This biological reality has always been understood, in various ways, by those who lived with and cared for such hair. Ancient practitioners, without modern microscopes, discerned how to nurture these diverse forms, developing methods that honored the hair’s natural tendencies. They understood that these strands, often more susceptible to dryness due to the winding path oils must travel down the shaft, required specific, deliberate care.

The CROWN Act seeks to legally protect the inherent right to express one’s racial identity through natural hair textures and protective styles.

This understanding gave rise to a lexicon of care, practices, and styles that celebrated the hair’s inherent characteristics. The classifications, though informal, were deeply practical, guiding the application of traditional butters, oils, and herbs to maintain vitality. This ancestral knowledge, passed through oral tradition and lived practice, forms a crucial foundation for understanding the hair itself, far beyond mere aesthetics.

However, with the brutal disruption of the transatlantic slave trade, these rich hair traditions faced systematic assault. Enslaved Africans were often forcibly shorn of their hair, a deliberate act designed to strip them of identity, culture, and connection to their ancestral past. This act of dehumanization laid the groundwork for centuries of hair discrimination, where Eurocentric beauty standards were imposed, and natural Black hair was deemed “unprofessional” or “unruly.” This historical erasure of identity, starting with the very crown, set a long-standing precedent.

How Did Historical Policies Undermine Hair Identity?

One potent historical example of this suppression, deeply connected to the CROWN Act’s purpose, is the infamous Tignon Laws of 1786 in Louisiana. Enacted by Spanish Governor Esteban Rodríguez Miró, these laws compelled free Black women, particularly those of mixed heritage who often styled their hair elaborately and attracted the attention of white men, to cover their hair with a headscarf, or “tignon.” The intention was clear ❉ to visibly mark these women as belonging to the slave class, regardless of their legal status, and to diminish their perceived social standing and allure. (Legal Defense Fund, 2022)

Yet, in a testament to the resilience of the human spirit and the enduring power of cultural expression, these women transformed the very tool of oppression into a statement of defiant beauty. They adorned their tignons with luxurious fabrics, ribbons, and jewels, turning the mandated covering into a mark of distinction, a vibrant assertion of identity and artistry that the law, focused only on the hair beneath, could not suppress. (Essence, 2020) This act of turning constraint into creativity is a powerful illustration of the enduring heritage that the CROWN Act now seeks to protect in a different form.

Ritual

As we move from the foundational understanding of textured hair’s heritage, we step into the living practices, the rituals that have sustained and celebrated these strands across time. The CROWN Act, in its essence, acknowledges that the care and styling of textured hair are not merely cosmetic choices; they are expressions of a deep cultural continuum, a ritualistic connection to ancestral wisdom that shapes our very being. This section explores how the Act intersects with the practical, often intimate, world of hair care and styling, affirming traditions that have long been undervalued or outright forbidden in various societal spheres.

For generations, Black and mixed-race communities have developed a wealth of styling techniques designed to protect, adorn, and express. These are not trends born of fleeting fashion, but practices rooted in necessity, artistry, and the profound understanding of textured hair’s needs. Protective styles, for instance, are not just a preference; they are a strategy to safeguard delicate strands from environmental elements, reduce manipulation, and encourage healthy growth. The CROWN Act directly addresses the historical discrimination against these very styles, which include a vast spectrum of traditional expressions.

Ancestral Roots of Protective Styles

The origins of many contemporary protective styles can be traced back thousands of years to various African societies. Consider the ubiquitous Cornrows, a technique found in ancient Egyptian carvings and across numerous West African cultures, used to convey social status, age, and tribal affiliation. (Afriklens, 2024) Or the intricate patterns of Bantu Knots, with their origins in the Bantu-speaking communities, offering both a sculptural aesthetic and a means to stretch and protect the hair.

(BLAM UK CIC, 2022) Locs, too, carry a deep spiritual and cultural weight, appearing in various forms across different ancestral traditions, from the Himba tribe in Namibia to spiritual practices across the continent. (Afriklens, 2024)

These styles were not just practical; they were often artistic masterpieces, reflecting the creativity and ingenuity of those who wore and crafted them. They served as a silent language, a visual narrative of belonging and heritage, particularly significant during times of oppression when overt cultural expression was suppressed. Enslaved Africans, for example, used cornrow patterns to create maps for escape or to hide rice seeds for survival. (BLAM UK CIC, 2022)

The CROWN Act protects the right to wear culturally significant hairstyles, recognizing them as extensions of racial identity and heritage.

The CROWN Act’s aim is to dismantle the systemic barriers that have historically prevented individuals from wearing these styles in professional or educational settings. It recognizes that requiring someone to alter their natural hair texture or remove a protective style to conform to Eurocentric standards is a form of racial discrimination. This legislative effort stands against a history where Black individuals, particularly women, have faced negative perceptions, lost opportunities, or even been disciplined for wearing their hair in styles like afros, braids, twists, or locs. (Legal Defense Fund, 2020)

A pivotal moment in this ongoing struggle was the 1981 case of Rogers V. American Airlines. Renee Rogers, a Black flight attendant, challenged American Airlines’ grooming policy that prohibited her from wearing cornrows. The court, however, sided with the airline, reasoning that braids were a “mutable characteristic” – something that could be changed – and therefore not intrinsically tied to race in a way that warranted protection under existing civil rights law.

(Justia Law, 1981) This ruling, and others like it, created a legal loophole that allowed hair discrimination to persist, effectively telling Black individuals that while their natural hair texture might be protected (like an afro), the styles they chose to wear their hair in were not. The CROWN Act directly addresses this historical legal failing, extending protection to hair texture and protective styles. (ADL, 2022)

Holistic Care Rooted in Ancestral Wisdom

Beyond styling, the regimen of radiance for textured hair has long been intertwined with ancestral wisdom. Traditional care rituals often centered on nourishing the hair and scalp with natural ingredients, understanding their unique properties.

• Chebe Powder ❉ Hailing from Chad, this mixture of cherry seeds, cloves, and chebe seeds is empirically recognized for its fortifying properties and ability to aid length retention, often applied as a paste within protective styles. (Premium Beauty News, 2024)
• Shea Butter ❉ Widely used across African tribes, this butter extracted from shea nuts is known for its moisturizing and protective qualities, leaving hair soft and manageable. (22 Ayur, 2024)
• Palm Kernel Oil ❉ In Cameroon, this oil is a traditional remedy for dry hair and to promote growth, used in oil baths or scalp massages. (LaLumiereCMWorld, 2025)

These traditional ingredients and practices speak to a deep understanding of hair health that predates modern cosmetology. The CROWN Act, while a legal instrument, supports the environment where these practices can be openly honored and continued without fear of penalty. It acknowledges that for many, caring for textured hair is not merely a routine; it is a ceremonial act, a connection to lineage, and a profound statement of self-acceptance.

Relay

As we consider the CROWN Act’s deeper implications, we move beyond its immediate legal definition to perceive its profound role in shaping cultural narratives and envisioning future hair traditions. This is where the strands of science, history, and social justice intertwine, revealing the less apparent complexities that the query about the CROWN Act’s central aim unearths. The Act stands as a testament to the enduring struggle for racial equity, recognizing that discrimination against hair is not merely an aesthetic slight, but a persistent manifestation of systemic racism, deeply rooted in historical power dynamics.

The Act, which stands for “Create a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair,” was established in 2019 to safeguard against discrimination based on race-based hairstyles. It broadens legal protection to include hair texture and protective styles like braids, locs, twists, and knots in both workplaces and public schools. (The Official CROWN Act, 2019) This legislation seeks to rectify a historical oversight in civil rights law, which, while prohibiting race-based discrimination, often failed to explicitly cover phenotypic characteristics inextricably linked to race, such as hair texture.

This legal gap created a pathway for employers and educational institutions to enforce appearance policies that disproportionately penalized Black and mixed-race individuals. (Economic Policy Institute, 2023)

What is the Biological Basis for Hair Discrimination?

The science of hair reveals that curl patterns are determined by the shape of the hair follicle; oval or elliptical follicles yield curly hair, while round follicles produce straight hair. (Curl Witch, 2024) The tightly coiled or zigzag patterns characteristic of many Black hair textures emerge from highly elliptical follicles, often positioned at an angle to the scalp. This biological reality means that certain hair textures naturally grow outwards, with volume and distinct curl patterns. Historically, these natural attributes have been unfairly judged against a Eurocentric standard of straight, smooth hair, leading to perceptions of unprofessionalism or unkemptness.

A 2020 study found that Black women with natural hairstyles were perceived as less professional, less competent, and less likely to be recommended for job interviews than candidates with straight hair. (Legal Defense Fund, 2020) This bias is not rooted in any objective measure of capability, but in entrenched societal prejudices.

How Does the CROWN Act Address Systemic Inequity?

The CROWN Act is a direct response to this ongoing systemic inequity. It operates on the premise that hair texture and protective styles are not merely “choices” but are inextricably linked to racial identity and heritage. By legally protecting these characteristics, the Act aims to:

1. Deconstruct Biased Standards ❉ It challenges the unspoken, often unconscious, biases that equate professionalism with Eurocentric hair aesthetics. By making hair discrimination illegal, it forces institutions to re-evaluate their grooming policies and recognize the validity of diverse hair expressions.
2. Promote Cultural Affirmation ❉ It provides a legal framework for Black and mixed-race individuals to wear their hair in ways that honor their cultural heritage without fear of reprisal. This fosters a sense of belonging and psychological safety, particularly for children in schools who have historically faced disproportionate disciplinary actions for their hair. (ADL, 2022)
3. Support Economic Equity ❉ Hair discrimination has directly impacted employment opportunities. Studies show that Black women are more likely to be sent home from work or denied job offers due to their hair. (Legal Defense Fund, 2019) The CROWN Act works to remove this barrier, allowing Black individuals to participate fully in the workforce without compromising their identity. With over 31.6 million Black people in the U.S. labor force, the CROWN Act could aid in reducing discrimination for a substantial portion of the workforce. (Economic Policy Institute, 2023)

The journey toward the CROWN Act’s passage at state and federal levels reflects a growing societal awareness and advocacy, spearheaded by Black women leaders and coalitions. (The Official CROWN Act, 2019) While it has gained significant momentum, passing in numerous states, its federal passage has faced legislative hurdles, highlighting the continued resistance to fully acknowledge and rectify hair-based racial discrimination. (Economic Policy Institute, 2023) The persistence of these efforts speaks to the deep-seated nature of the issue and the profound impact of the Act on individuals’ lives.

The Act redefines the boundaries of anti-discrimination law, asserting that racial identity extends to the very texture and styling of one’s hair.

The CROWN Act, then, is not just a legal document; it is a cultural declaration. It signifies a collective societal step towards recognizing that hair, particularly textured hair, is a powerful symbol of identity, a link to a rich ancestral past, and a living testament to resilience. Its aim is to create a future where every strand is celebrated, and no one is penalized for expressing their authentic self, rooted in their unique heritage.

Reflection

The journey through the CROWN Act’s essence reveals a profound truth ❉ the goal extends far beyond legal mandates. It is a societal acknowledgment of the enduring heritage woven into every coil, kink, and braid of textured hair. This legislation serves as a contemporary echo of ancestral wisdom, affirming that our strands are not merely biological formations but living extensions of history, culture, and identity.

It is a call to recognize that the beauty and resilience inherent in Black and mixed-race hair are not just personal attributes but a shared legacy, a vibrant testament to survival and creativity. The Act’s deepest aim is to foster a world where the soul of a strand is not just tolerated, but celebrated, revered, and understood as a vital part of the human tapestry, allowing future generations to wear their crowns with unburdened pride, forever connected to the deep, flowing currents of their heritage.

References

• Byrd, A. & Tharps, L. (2001). Hair Story ❉ Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America. St. Martin’s Press.
• Dabiri, E. (2020). Twisted ❉ The Tangled History of Black Hair Culture. Harper Perennial.
• Rooks, N. M. (1996). Hair Raising ❉ Beauty, Culture, and African American Women. Rutgers University Press.
• Caldwell, P. M. (2008). Intersectional Bias and the Courts ❉ The Story of Rogers v. Am. Airlines. In Race Law Stories (pp. 571-590). Foundation Press.
• Greene, D. W. (2017). Splitting Hairs ❉ The Eleventh Circuit’s Take on Workplace Bans Against Black Women’s Natural Hair in EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions. University of Miami Law Review, 71(3), 987-1030.
• McGill-Johnson, A. Godsil, R. MacFarlane, J. Tropp, L. & Goff, P. (2017). The Good Hair Study ❉ Explicit and Implicit Attitudes Toward Black Women’s Hair. Perception Institute.
• Boyd, A. (2023). Hair Me Out ❉ Why Discrimination Against Black Hair is Race Discrimination Under Title VII. American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, 31(1), 75-104.