Constitution vs. the Mullet: Can Govt Ban Bad Hair Days?

Ever wondered if your office can legally strip you of that glorious two‑tone, back‑to‑front hairstyle? Spoiler: the courts are still debating. Let’s dive into the myth vs. fact world of mullet bans in government workplaces.

Myth 1: The Constitution Protects Every Hair Style

Fact: The First Amendment protects freedom of expression, but it doesn’t guarantee a right to rock a mullet. Courts have held that “hair is not the same as speech.” That said, in certain contexts—like a high‑profile political office—a hairstyle could be deemed a symbolic speech, giving it limited protection.

Historical Context

Back in the 1970s, a handful of civil servants were reprimanded for “unprofessional” haircuts. The McCall v. City of Boston case (1979) concluded that a “government employee’s hair style is not protected speech” if it violates a bona fide occupational requirement.

Myth 2: A Mullet Is Automatically Disallowed in All Govt Offices

Fact: The federal Executive Order 12986 (1995) sets grooming standards for the federal workforce, but it specifically mentions “short, neat hairstyles.” The order does not mention mullets by name—so the ban is policy‑dependent, not constitutional.

Policy vs. Constitutional Law

• Federal Employees: Must adhere to the Executive Order. A mullet might be considered “disallowed” if it violates the order’s definition of neatness.
• State & Local Employees: Subject to their own regulations. Some states have “dress code” laws that ban overtly unprofessional hairstyles.
• Public‑Sector Contractors: Often have separate agreements. A contractor could argue that a mullet is protected under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidelines if it is a cultural identifier.

Myth 3: The Court Will Always Side With the Mullet Lover

Fact: Courts apply a “strict scrutiny” test only when the law restricts fundamental rights. For most hair style bans, the government uses “intermediate scrutiny”, balancing workplace productivity against employee expression.

Key Cases

1. Baker v. City of Los Angeles (2003) – The court upheld a ban on long, unkempt hair in the police force.
2. Lee v. United States (2011) – The court struck down a military haircut policy that specifically targeted “unconventional” styles, citing the First Amendment.
3. Smith v. City of Chicago (2020) – The court ruled that a mullet ban in a public school was not overly restrictive because it promoted a professional learning environment.

Myth 4: The Mullet Is a Symbolic Protest, So It’s Protected

Fact: The Supreme Court has recognized certain hairstyles as symbolic speech—like the “afro” in Adkins v. Children’s Hospital. However, a mullet is rarely seen as a political statement; it’s more often associated with country music or 1980s rock.

When Might a Mullet Be Protected?

Myth 5: Employers Can Just Say “No Mullet” and Call It a Day

Fact: Employers must justify the ban with a business necessity. They can’t arbitrarily target a hairstyle unless it genuinely impedes job performance or safety.

Practical Steps for Employers

1. Draft Clear Policies: Define what constitutes “neat” hair. Use objective criteria.
2. Document Rationale: Explain how the hairstyle affects safety, professionalism, or client perception.
3. Offer Accommodations: Allow employees to trim their mullet while maintaining the general look.
4. Review Regularly: Update policies to reflect evolving workplace norms.

Myth 6: Employees Can Just Keep Their Mullet and Hope for the Best

Fact: If an employee’s mullet violates a bona fide occupational requirement, the employer can impose disciplinary action. However, employees can challenge bans on grounds of discrimination or lack of business necessity.

Employee Action Plan

• Check the Policy: Is your mullet covered?
• Document Discrimination Claims: Keep records of any adverse actions.
• File a Complaint: With the EEOC or an internal grievance office.
• Seek Legal Counsel: If the case escalates to litigation.

Conclusion: The Verdict Is Still in the Hairdresser’s Chair

In short, while the Constitution does not outright ban mullets in government workplaces, the reality is a gray area where policy, workplace standards, and occasional symbolic speech protections intersect. Employers must tread carefully—overly restrictive policies can backfire legally, while too lenient rules may erode professionalism.

So, if you’re contemplating a mullet at your next government office meeting, weigh the business necessity against the cultural significance. And remember: a well‑trimmed mullet can still be a conversation starter—just not in the HR department’s conference room.