NCJ Number
13793
Journal
Albany Law Review Volume: 38 Issue: 3 Dated: (1974) Pages: 387-406
Date Published
1974
Length
20 pages
Annotation
REVIEW OF LITIGATION BY POLICE, FIREMEN, AND OTHER PLAINTIFFS ASSERTING A RIGHT TO GROW LONG HAIR, BEARDS, AND MUSTACHES DESPITE PROHIBITIVE REGULATIONS.
Abstract
COURT ACTION BY LITIGANTS IN BOTH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS IS REVIEWED, INCLUDING ACTIONS BY EMPLOYEES OF COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS, SCHOOL TEACHERS, POLICEMEN, FIREMEN, MILITARY RESERVISTS AND ACTIVE DUTY REGULARS, AND PRISONERS. THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CONTROL ONE'S OWN APPEARANCE APPEARS TO BE DIFFERENT ACCORDING TO THE CONTEXT OF THE SITUATION. COURTS HAVE BEEN RELUCTANT TO GRANT ANY TYPE OF ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO WEAR ONE'S HAIR THE WAY HE WISHES OR TO GROW A BEARD OR A MUSTACHE. THEY HAVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, REFUSED ANY PUBLIC, PRIVATE, OR OFFICIAL BLANKET BANNING OF ANY RIGHT IN THIS AREA AT ALL. A BALANCING TEST IS USED, JUST AS IN ANY OTHER WEIGHING OF AN ASSERTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT AGAINST THE COUNTERVAILING FACTORS. THE POLICEMEN AND FIREMEN CASES ITERATE THAT THE CONTEXT OF THE WORK MAKES A DIFFERENCE, ALTHOUGH THE FEDERAL CIRCUITS ARE DIVIDED ON THE EXTENT OF GROOMING RIGHTS. THE PRISON HAIR CASES ARE ANALOGOUS TO THE RATIONALE USED BY COURTS IN DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN REGULARS AND RESERVES IN THE MILITARY CASES. LIKE RESERVISTS, PRETRIAL DETAINEES WHO ARE NOT YET CONVICTED SHOULD NOT BE GOVERNED BY THE STRINGENT REGULATIONS ON GROOMING WITHIN THE SPHERE WHICH DOES NOT YET APPLY TO THEM. CONVICTED PRISONERS, LIKE REGULAR ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL ARE ALREADY COMMITTED TO THE SPECIAL WORLD OF PRISON. CONSEQUENTLY, WHEN SUFFICIENT STATE INTERESTS ARE DEMONSTRATED, THEIR GROOMING RIGHTS ARE DIMINISHED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)