Republican judge rules that a law specifically made to stop this type of discrimination does not apply to black students.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/darryl-texas-schools-hair-length-policies-violate-crown-george-rcna140014 A Texas judge struck a blow to the state’s newly adopted CROWN Act on Thursday, ruling that a public school district can continue to punish a Black teen who wears his hair in locs.
In a trial that lasted just a few hours, Judge Chap Cain III ruled that Barbers Hill Independent School District did not violate the CROWN Act when it subjected Darryl George, 18, to in-school suspensions and off-site instruction for nearly six months.
George has been isolated from his peers for most of the school year since he was first disciplined by Barbers Hill High School in August for violating the school’s dress code.
George wears his hair in long, thick locs, which the school says is against its policy governing boys’ hair. Its dress code says boys may not wear their hair longer than their eyebrows, below their ears or past a T-shirt collar—a policy critics say stems from anti-Black stereotypes.
Barbers Hill Independent School District had filed for clarification of the CROWN Act, which prohibits workplace discrimination based on hairstyles associated with race and was signed into state law in September. It maintained that its policy did not violate the CROWN Act because the act doesn’t say anything about hair length. George’s lawyers argued that the CROWN Act protects his locs regardless of length because they are associated with race.
Before the trial, George stated that he refuses to cut his hair because the style helps him feel close to his ancestors. “I started my dreads for a reason, and that’s just to feel close to my people,” he said.
Anonymous
Although the judge sided with the school district in its interpretation of the CROWN Act, Texas Rep. Ron Reynolds, one of the law’s co-authors, said that George’s locs should be protected under it. Reynolds testified that although length wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the text, the CROWN Act should cover locs because “length was inferred with the very nature of the style.” This isn’t the first time Barbers Hill has come under scrutiny for unfairly punishing Black students over its dress code. In 2020, another Black student filed suit against the district when he was told he couldn’t walk at graduation because of his hair. In the district, Black students make up only 4 percent of the student body. George plans to appeal the judge’s ruling, extending the legal battle even though he has already spent most of his junior year under suspension. Before the trial, he told reporters he was tired of constantly having to fight for his right to education because of cultural expression. “It just makes me feel angry, very angry,” he said, “that throughout all these years, throughout all the fighting for the Black History that we’ve done, that we still have to do this again, and again, and again. It’s ridiculous.”
Anonymous
Quoted By:
There's ample evidence that dreadlocks cause excessive amounts of crime and should be banned, regulated, and a national registry should be created.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269726 nice of those elephants to start letting jews and blacks into their group. very inclusive.
Anonymous
>>1269726 >Uh republicns are the real pedos he he OK groomer
Anonymous
>>1269726 >CROWN act Is the "We Wuz Kangz" shit really that mainstream?
Anonymous
>>1269757 2020 called and wants its meaningless buzzword back.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1269726 >>1269729 I'm okay with this. Don't want to be treated like a criminal? Don't dress like one!
Anonymous
>>1269757 >Grand Old Pedophile Projecting again *yawn*
How'd defending the child rapist and murderer Trump going for you?
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269877 I took a moment a while back to look at the propaganda blog.
There are some, but many of the crimes listed are just crimes.
It's like DailyKOS is propaganda or something.
Why would a propaganda blog spread propaganda?
Anonymous
>>1269837 You claim this as you light the constitution on fire.
Anonymous
>>1269890 People should wash their hair. That's all there is to it.
Anonymous
>>1269918 Suddenly that's not a first amendment right?
Anonymous
>>1269922 And I suppose calling your teach the N-word is, huh, CHUD?
Anonymous
>>1269925 I mean Republicans are racists.
these kids nowadays, in my day we'd show them the rope,and they'd be civilized
these kids nowadays, in my day we'd show them the rope,and they'd be civilized Fri 23 Feb 2024 05:24:57 No. 1269929 Report >>1269726 Why don't these black kids wise and get their straightened and crewcut?
They might get a decent job one day working for a white man.
these kids nowadays, in my day we'd show them the rope,and they'd be civilized
these kids nowadays, in my day we'd show them the rope,and they'd be civilized Fri 23 Feb 2024 05:26:10 No. 1269930 Report Quoted By:
>>1269929 >get their straightened and crewcut Oopsy
get their HAIR straightened and crewcuted.
Anonymous
>>1269726 >policy for boys' hair Why not sue for gender discrimination if it only applies to boys?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269976 This is the same state trying to police crossdressing. As if they give a fuck about gender discrimination bans either.
It will be faster to just appeal this shit up to a higher court. You can't actually ignore your own citizen's rights.
Anonymous
>>1269769 As in the crown of the head, you illiterate fuckwit. How the fuck have you never heard Jack and Jill? Not only do you have to be at least 18 to post here, you definitely have to be at least 4.
Anonymous
>>1269978 No need to be hostile, English isn't my first language.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1269985 Why are you letting them suck your penis?
>>1269929 >Why don't these black kids wise and get their straightened and crewcut? They tried that, and all they got was the white man's leavings.
Anonymous
Men with long hair will destroy the fabric of society. Look at all those rock and roll players and how they turned everyone into demons with their long strands of hair, HARLOTRY
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269998 >Women with long hair will destroy society ftfy
Anonymous
>>1269772 >>1269854 >>1269877 >>1269890 >>1269922 >>1269928 >>1269992 Democrat libtrannies ruin everything they touch. You will never be a woman
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270159 what does your obsession have to do with anything, shill
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269983 >No need to be hostile, English isn't my first language. I mean there was though.
Anonymous
>>1269726 >Its dress code says boys may not wear their hair longer than their eyebrows, below their ears or past a T-shirt collar—a policy critics say stems from anti-Black stereotypes. Unless the school is letting White boys get away with having long hair, I don't see how this policy is "anti-Black"?
Though I don't see why or how a _public school_ can enforce a policy like this in the first place?
Also;
>Barbers Hill Independent School District lol
Anonymous
>>1269890 So where does it say in the constitution you can be a slob or a piece of shit as a federally protected right? Schools and workplaces both have rights to tell your ass what to wear for public order and non-distraction. The 1A doesn't protect a right to wear shit (or not wear shit), it's for speech, press, and religion. It's doesn't say you can roll around with lice all up in your hairdo.
Also, Democrats have no hill to stand on when it comes to the Constitution. They've already burnt the flag and wiped their ass with the constitution, no one with a brain takes them seriously on matters of constitutional merit.
Anonymous
>>1270171 Remember COVID? How everyone freaked out and went full authoritarian? That's how. Replace COVID with lice. Kids are nasty little fucks, and you don't want out of control dreads with lice infestations (or bedbugs) spreading that shit to hundreds of other kids.
And blacks are the prime candidates for spreading lice because their single moms don't give a shit or can't afford shit to keep their kids clean. They can wear their shitty ass hairdos when they drop out and hit the streets.
Anonymous
>>1270181 Not to mention that you can't wash your hair if you have dreadlocks because they're held together by filth.
Lice, roaches, and bedbugs love dreadlocks.
Anonymous
>>1270178 >So where does it say in the constitution you can be a slob or a piece of shit as a federally protected right? In this case the 10th Amendment seeing as Texas has protected this at the state level.
Also the 14th Amendment since these crackdowns are consistently on racial or ethnic grounds.
Also, while I'm shitting on you, I'd just like to point out that choices of clothing can fall under freedom of speech.
>They've already burnt the flag and wiped their ass with the constitution Also freedom of speech.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._Johnson Why the fuck do you hate our basic rights so much?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270184 If vermin loved dreadlocks, you'd be in favor of them.
Anonymous
>>1270200 So, calling your teacher with greasy dreads the n-word is allowed in school?
Anonymous
>>1270202 >So, calling your teacher with greasy dreads the n-word is allowed in school? No. Don't be stupid. Fighting words aren't protected under the 1st amendment.
Anonymous
>>1270203 That's not a fighting word.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270205 are you sure? have you done field experiments?
Anonymous
>>1270205 >That's not a fighting word. Fighting words is a legal term of art in US law that means "a direct personal insult or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs" (literally also Texas v. Johnson).
Pretty sure that's a direct, personal insult, you dumbass motherfucker.
Anonymous
>>1270208 Yet fighting words require aggressive action in addition to speech.
>May I please go to the bathroom, Mr. N-word would be protected speech. Is this acceptable in school?
Judging by your initial resistance to the idea, I'd imagine you don't agree.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269998 Jesus loves you.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269726 I don't know what rightwingers have against this boy's hair, they always have to throw a temper tantrum over the most benign shit for some reason. Looks fine to me.
Anonymous
>>1270184 You can wash dreadlocks
Anonymous
>>1270209 >Yet fighting words require aggressive No. They don't.
>>1270220 Don't try to teach the animals. They might become dependent on you for knowledge and that isn't healthy for anyone since it will bring them into more contact and conflict with people.
Anonymous
^and this guy tries to imply he wouldn't be a confederate
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270226 Why the fuck would I be a confederate? I don't like losing, dying, or being cucked.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270159 We get it, you're an incel.
Anonymous
>>1270223 >No. They don't. Yes they do.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269726 >Republican judge declares Texas Schools Can Discriminate Against Black Students for Their Hairstyles Yet again the title doesn't match the story.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1269729 typical fragile black can't follow the rules
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270252 No, they fucking don't. Aggressive actions are already fucking illegal. Fighting words can be policed in and of themselves.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270178 >>1270181 >>1270184 >blacks are the prime candidates for spreading lice Black people statistically get lice less often than other races. Their hair texture generally doesn't provide an environment in which lice can thrive.
Anonymous
>>1270184 You're an idiot. Dreads, Dutch braids, have been around for thousands of years because it helps protect against parasites. Lice like clean, straight hair because their feet are adapted to that. Kinky hair isn't conducive to their survival, nor is oily or greasy hair. Educate yourself, nimrod.
Anonymous
>>1270336 Found the gross dude that twists all the dirt and dread of the Earth into his hair summoning malevolent spirits that smell like year old ass.
Anonymous
>>1270396 is it your constitutional right to be offended by hair
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270402 he's outraged because the black kid in the story gets more attention than he gets
Anonymous
>>1270402 You signed a social contract. Wash your hair.
Anonymous
>>1270416 The social contract says to respect other people's fashion choices.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1270427 Yes it literally does.
https://discoversocialsciences.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Rousseau-Social-Contract.pdf >In climates in which the changes of season are prompt and violent, men have better and simpler clothes; where they clothe themselves only for adornment, what is
striking is more thought of than what is useful; clothes themselves are then a luxury
Anonymous
>>1270497 That doesn't speak to filthy hair at all.
And that's not the social contract.
Anonymous
>>1270509 there's no "the" social contract
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1270512 I know. I've always known.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Doesn't the Bible teach that if someone wants to cut your hair against your will, you should murder them and all their associates?
Anonymous
>>1269726 If they actually let pedophiles in, they would steal too many voters from the Democrats
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1271072 Can anyone here translate this chudspeak?