« Texas Education Agency Firing Over Creationism E-Mail Upheld | Main | Committee Delays Kagan Vote One Week »

Court Backs American Indian Student's Long Hair

A Texas school district violated the religious rights of an American Indian student when it sought to restrict how he wore his long, braided hair, a federal appeals court has ruled.

The Needville Independent School District near Houston has a dress code requiring boys to keep their hair short, not touching their ears or the tops of their shirt collars.

Michelle Betenbaugh and Kenney Arocha, the parents of an elementary school student identified in court papers as A.A., sought permission from the district beginning in 2007 to allow the boy to keep his hair in two long braids. The father and son, who are members of the Lipan Apache Tribe of Texas, contend that wearing long hair is part of a sincere religious belief and symbolizes their ancestry and their length of life, according to court papers.

After much back and forth over the family's request for an exemption to the dress code, the school district offered to let A.A. wear his hair in a bun over his head or in a single braid tucked inside his shirt while in school. The family rejected the idea and sued the district under the U.S. Constitution and the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The state law bars any government agency in Texas from "substantially burden[ing] a person's free exercise of religion" unless it "demonstrates that the application of the burden to the person is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and is the least restrictive means of furthering that interest."

A federal district court ruled for the family under the Texas law, and in a 2-1 decision on July 9, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, in New Orleans, did as well.

U.S. Circuit Judge Patrick E. Higginbotham, in the majority opinion in A.A. v. Needville Independent School District, said the school district's restrictions would represent a "significant" burden on the boy's religious beliefs.

A.A. "has a sincere religious belief in wearing his hair uncut and in plain view," Judge Higginbotham wrote. "That belief is substantially burdened by the district's grooming policy—even with the district's proffered exemptions; and the district has put forth insufficient justification for its persistence in this matter."

In dissent, Judge E. Grady Jolly said the majority confused A.A.'s right to keep the length of his hair with the right to keep it visible.

"Clearly, none of the other 'off the collar' options proposed by the school district impose a substantial burden on A.A's belief that he should not cut his hair," Judge Jolly wrote.

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Follow This Blog


Most Viewed on Education Week



Recent Comments

  • shutters: Its difficult once your kids get older to keep them read more
  • Joel Reidenberg: The study does not challenge the value to local schools read more
  • Joe: So, public schools are collecting their students' data in ways read more
  • JT: I still find it unbelievable that people can work in read more
  • Sandra Surace: What can a person do who suffered retaliation by school read more