Last year, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the CROWN Act, which prohibits discrimination based on hair texture or hairstyles commonly associated with race or ethnic identity.
But the law does not prohibit dress codes that restrict hair length to two inches or less.
And that's the heart of a court case that began this week between Darryl George and the Barbers Hill Independent School District.
George, a high school student, wears his hair in a long loc style. The district's dress code states that males students hair "will not extend below the eyebrows, below the ear lobes, or below the top of a t-shirt collar."
George has been disciplined for refusing to cut his hair. He and his family contend the dress code violates the CROWN Act. An attorney for the George family told CNN they would "seek justice for Black males at BHISD who have long been and are still being discriminated against."
The school district insist the law allows limits of hair length.
"Texas law mandates that there can be no implied meaning with interpreting statutes. The CROWN Act was meant to allow braids, locs or twists, which the district has always allowed. The law was never intended to allow unlimited student expression," Barbers Hill Superintendent Greg Poole told CNN in response.
Poole also took out a full-page ad in the Houston Chronicle in January saying "being an American requires conformity with the positive benefit of unity."
On Thursday, the court ruled in favor of the school district.
But the case has also raised questions about whether school district dress codes limiting hair length exclusively for male students are inherently sexist and discriminatory.
We want to know what you think. Should a school district have a limit on hair length for male students? Or is the concept outdated?
Send your response (50 words maximum) to [email protected] by Wednesday, February 28. You can also mail your response to the Texarkana Gazette Friday Poll, at P.O. Box 621, Texarkana, TX 75504 or drop it off at our office, 101 E. Broad St, Texarkana, Ark. Be sure to include your name, address and phone number. We will print as many responses as we can in next Friday's paper.
Last Week: Fit for Office?
Last week's question was about Special Counsel Robert Hur finding that President Joe Biden, at age 81, might be seen by a jury as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory" and subsequent suggestions from the president's critics that he might be removed from office under the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constituion. Are you concerned about President Biden's age and mental competence? Should the 25th Amendment be invoked?
I am concerned about Biden's age. But I'd rather have a "feeble old man" in office rather than a "feeble old man who is also a racist, dictator wanna be" in office. -- R.M., Texarkana, Arkansas
No, I am not concerned about President Biden's age and mental competence, because he has accomplished so much more then Trump. I am more concerned with Trump getting back in, with his deranged and dictator mentality, that should concern all Americans. If the 25th amendment wasn't invoked for Trump, why would it be invoked on President Biden. Folks forget Trump is old and mentally deranged, so why do they not have a problem with him? -- R.K., Texarkana, Texas
From facebook.com/texarkanagazette
- The majority of cabinet members haven't even suggested such a move because, as you say, the investigation was simply a "suggestion." Yes I'm concerned about Biden's age but Trump is nearly the same age and gets even more mixed up.
- If Biden is too old, so is Trump