House advances bill banning discrimination over hair types and protective styles

The Vermont House on Jan. 30 ordered a third reading of H.363, legislation that would prohibit discrimination based on certain hair types, textures and protective hairstyles in public accommodations and education settings.

Member from Morristown, presenting the bill for the Committee on General and Housing, said the measure clarifies that "race includes traits associated with or perceived to be associated with race, including hair type, hair texture, hairstyles, and protective hairstyles." The presentation said the language was informed by the Crown Act and by testimony the committee heard from the Vermont Chamber of Commerce, the Vermont School Boards Association, the Vermont Human Rights Commission and the Attorney General's civil rights unit.

The presenter told the chamber the bill aims to address what supporters described as widespread harms: "Hair discrimination, also known as texturism, is real," the Member from Morristown said, citing workplace and school surveys and recounting personal family examples of children and students impacted by hair-related policies. The bill would also list protective hairstyles (for example, individual braids, cornrows, locks, twists, bantu knots, afros and puffs) and include wigs and head wraps in certain protections. Section 3 of the bill sets an effective date of July 1, 2024.

Members asked procedural and substantive questions on the floor. The Member from Burlington asked why the effective date was not upon passage; the presenter said the committee placed the July 1 date as common practice but would reassess the timing when the floor amendment is offered. A Member from Fair Haven raised a safety question about athletic headgear and whether schools might have to restrict participation for safety reasons; the presenter said children should not be penalized for their hair and that helmet sizing and accommodations exist, but acknowledged the committee had not completed research on that specific interaction.

A distributed floor amendment from members including the Member from Northfield was not offered that day; the sponsor said the amendment will be offered the following day. The House then approved the committee's recommended amendment by voice vote and, by voice, ordered a third reading. The floor record shows voice votes and confirmation that "the ayes do have it"; no roll-call tally appears in the transcript.

What happens next: The bill is set for further floor consideration when the sponsor offers the floor amendment and the House takes up third reading.