Executive Calendar

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PAUL. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other Federal statutes prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin.

The Supreme Court found in the 1973 case McDonnell Douglas Corporation v. Green that using a pretextual reason as cover for discrimination is a violation of Federal civil rights law. Subsequently, the protections sought by this bill are already provided for in Federal law. Using hairstyle as a pretext for racial discrimination is already illegal.

But there is reason to believe that this bill is not ready for enactment. When the House Judiciary Committee considered this legislation, some Members questioned whether this legislation would prevent certain hairstyles and lengths out of concern that they may hinder workplace safety or the ability to perform certain critical functions of the job. For example, employers may require certain hairstyles so that personal protective equipment properly protects the wearer.

Many questions remain unanswered about whether this bill would prevent employers from imposing race-neutral standards, such as maintaining a hairstyle that makes it difficult to become caught in machinery on a factory floor or the ability to properly wear a helmet at a construction site.

This bill would make workers less safe, make it more difficult to start a business and provide jobs, and almost certainly result in expensive litigation and overburdened courts.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source