A proposal to bar “discrimination based on hairstyles relative to a person’s ethnicity” was deemed “inexpedient to legislate” by the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday in an 11-10 vote along party lines.
This article was first published by New Hampshire Bulletin
Rep. Alexis Simpson, an Exeter Democrat, spoke in support of the bill, as well as an amendment that was introduced to broaden the measure to include protections related to gender and sexual orientation. Simpson said that since the bill was introduced, at least 14 other states have passed some kind of language to ban discrimination based on hairstyle.
House Bill 359 was introduced last session after a New Jersey wrestler was forced to cut his dreadlocks. A civil rights investigation followed, and a lawyer representing the player later said he faced ongoing discrimination. HB 359 was retained in committee last session.
Rep. Mark McLean, a Manchester Republican, opposed introducing “more and more granularity” into the human rights statute, where the new language would be added.
“If you start to go down that path then that will have the impact, I think, of weakening the protections that are offered in some of the broader categories,” he said. He pointed to the example of an accent, which is not explicitly mentioned but conceivably covered under protections for race or country of origin.
Democrats on the committee pushed back, saying that the addition of this language wouldn’t take rights away from anyone.
While the amendment to broaden the language of the bill passed, the bill ultimately received a recommendation of “inexpedient to legislate” and will be voted on by the full House in January.
New Hampshire Bulletin is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Hampshire Bulletin maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Dana Wormald for questions: info@newhampshirebulletin.com. Follow New Hampshire Bulletin on Facebook and Twitter.
