Creating A Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair Act of 2022
Floor Speech
Mr. Speaker, racial discrimination is wrong; it is un-American; and it is contrary to our ideals. Our Federal civil rights laws recognize these facts. The laws are clear, and courts have been consistent that disparate treatment of one individual when compared to another cannot be based on race, color, or national origin.
A person also cannot use a pretextual reason as cover for taking a discriminatory action prohibited by our civil rights laws. The Supreme Court settled that issue in 1973. As early as 1976, Federal courts held that discrimination on the basis of a hairstyle associated with a certain race or national origin may, in fact, constitute racial discrimination.
In other words, under current law, if a person's hairstyle or hair texture is associated with a person's race or national origin and is used as a pretext for discrimination, that conduct is unlawful.
These decades of precedent make the bill that we are debating today unnecessary and duplicative. In fact, the chairman of the committee just said that 3 minutes ago.
The problem raised by the Democrats is one solved by enforcing our existing laws, not by making this conduct illegal for a second time.
The Democrats may have recognized this fact if they had held legislative hearings on this bill this Congress, but they didn't. So, the Committee on the Judiciary didn't have the opportunity to hear from experts about the legislation or how it comports with existing law. That is just one example of the deficient process that brought this bill to the floor today.
At markup, Republican members of the Committee on the Judiciary raised multiple concerns about this bill's potential impact. For example, schools, employers, and other entities covered by Federal civil rights laws may have race-neutral policies that everyone must follow. These policies are sometimes necessary to ensure an employee can adequately and safely do their job, such as a prohibition on hairstyles that could prevent a firefighter from properly wearing a respirator or a helmet.
This bill, however, may jeopardize these policies because it creates a blanket prohibition on adverse treatment because of certain hairstyles or hair textures.
These concerns and the Democrats' deficient process caused every Republican Member to oppose this bill at markup. Instead of working to address these problems, the Democrats are bringing this bill, which was reported on a party-line vote, to a vote under suspension of the rules. The Democrats are prioritizing this legislation, a bill to prohibit conduct already unlawful under our law, for political messaging reasons.
This bill does not address any of the serious problems our country currently faces. Think about the crime problem; the 40-year-high inflation problem; the 2 million illegal immigrants that have come across our border in 1 year's time alone; and, of course, not to mention the situation going on in Ukraine as we speak.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, what is Congress doing today? What is the people's House--under the Democrat majority--what is the House of Representatives up to today? Passing a bill to prohibit conduct that is already unlawful under the law. Discrimination based on hairstyle is already unlawful.
That is what the Congress, what the House of Representatives, is going to pass today. Think about it. That is the priority today when we have gone in literally 1 year's time from a secure border to complete chaos. Two million illegal crossings in 1 year on our border. In fact, we don't really have a border.
We have gone from safe streets to record crime in every major urban area in 1 year's time. They are focused on a bill to make conduct that is already unlawful, unlawful again, I guess.
We went from energy independence to the spectacle of the President of the United States begging OPEC to increase production. We have gone from stable prices to a 40-year high inflation rate, and Democrats are focused on this bill.
This past summer we had the debacle that was the exit from Afghanistan. As we speak, the Ukrainian people are fighting for their lives, and Democrats are passing a bill to prohibit conduct already unlawful under Federal law, a bill that says you can't discriminate based on hairstyle, which is already unlawful.
We have had a year now where Democrats attack every liberty we enjoy under the First Amendment, every single one. There are still some locations in America where a full congregation cannot meet on a Sunday morning. There are some places where you still can't assemble and can't petition.
The Democrats have kept the Capitol closed to the American people, their own darn Capitol. How are you supposed to come in and petition your Member to redress your grievances if you are not even allowed in your Capitol that your tax dollars pay for? Of course, we know what they have done to freedom of speech and the attacks there. Their focus today is on this bill.
Madam Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote. Let's focus on the issues that I think the vast majority of the American people want us to focus on like crime, like the 40-year high inflation rate, like the border problem, and like the fact that we were an energy independent country just a few months back. Let's focus on those issues.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source