An Exploration of the CROWN Act’s Relevance to Black Women in the Academy

• In Event: Gatekeeping and Gaslighting: Systematic Obstructions to Tenure for Black Women Faculty

Abstract

The tenure trajectory of Black women is impacted by the current white backlash movements enmeshing higher education as a field and society more broadly (e.g., Garces et al., 2021; Lewis et al., 2023). This backlash has further entrenched racism and white normativity that heightens the importance of efforts that counteract white backlash, as well as advance racial equity. In this project, I examine one such counter that seeks to advance the rights of Black women in the workforce nationwide. With a focus on higher education, I historicize and map the contours of the Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair (CROWN) Act. The (proposed) law seeks to create protections for Black women by prohibiting race-based hair discrimination in employment. Black women have faced historical discrimination based on their hair when it has not conformed to white normative ideals of “professionalism” (author, 2006; Opie & Phillips, 2015; Onwuachi-Willig, 2010), placing Black women in a dilemma. Morrison (2010) aptly described the dilemma, noting: “Straightening is whitening. Whitening is bettering. Therefore, straightening is bettering. This “bettering” makes Black women more acceptable in environments dominated by whites” (p. 89).
This project relies on law as a framework (see Rebell, 2011) and uses a critical lens to explore the developments and current status of the Act. I use legal research methodology (Eckes & McCall, 2014; McCarthy, 2010; Mead, 2009; author, 2021). Mead (2009) noted, “Legal research may seek to capture the current statutory boundaries and jurisprudential thinking on a topic in order to describe its implications, both for current practice and for future policy development” (p. 287). I examine the Act’s boundaries regarding employment discrimination as it implicates higher education. To retrieve pertinent documents, I use LexisNexis, a legal search database. I employ legal reasoning, including statutory interpretation, to discern the law’s historical genesis, statutory bounds, and geographic and substantive scope, including who it protects and what it prohibits. Generally, historicization and examination of the law demonstrates that its roots lie in a history of racial discrimination against Black women and its intent extends to a change in professional norms. The CROWN Act is the law in 23 states, has passed in the U.S. House, and remains pending in the U.S. Senate.
The CROWN Act has implications for research, policy, and practice. For instance, regarding research, the field needs further legal research to understand how courts interpret the Act in the context of employment discrimination in higher education and empirical research to determine whether it’s effective, who benefits from its protections, and to identify other downstream unintended consequences. Regarding state and federal policy, the research can inform the development and adoption of the law in states that have yet to adopt it. At the practice level, institutions in states where the law is adopted will need to revise policies and engage in further discussions that create broader systemic change that decenters white normativity in the workplace and values Black women (see Morrison, 2010; Pattison, 2006; Opie & Phillips, 2015).

Author

• Raquel Muñiz, Boston College