A Michigan hair salon owner who told transgender customers to “seek services at a local pet groomer instead” has learned the outcome of a years-long legal battle.
Keep reading to learn more.
The Michigan Civil Rights Commission ruled that Studio 8 Hair Lab violated state anti-discrimination law after salon owner Christine Geiger published Facebook posts in 2023 saying transgender people were “not welcome” at her business.
The commission ordered the salon to remove the posts, provide services regardless of customers’ gender identity, complete anti-discrimination training, and publish a statement acknowledging its obligations under Michigan law.
“Speech is one thing, but telling people they aren’t welcome at your business is another,” one netizen wrote.
The Facebook posts sparked dozens of complaints
The case began in July 2023, when Geiger, who owns Studio 8 Hair Lab in Traverse City, Michigan, shared several Facebook posts about transgender people.
One post read, “If a human identifies as anything other than a man/woman, please seek services at a local pet groomer.”
It continued, “You are not welcome at this salon. Period.”
Geiger also wrote that if customers asked employees to use their preferred pronouns, staff might simply call them “hey you.”
In another post, she argued that her business had the right to refuse service.
“This is America; free speech. This small business has the right to refuse services.”
She also criticized Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and legislation expanding civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ people.
The posts quickly spread online and drew widespread criticism.
Between July and November 2023, more than 20 complaints were submitted to the Michigan Department of Civil Rights. Three of those complaints ultimately formed the basis of the state’s legal case against the salon.
Although none of the complainants had attempted to book an appointment, state officials said Michigan law also prohibits businesses from publicly advertising that protected groups are unwelcome.
Katie Adraianse, spokesperson for the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, told the Daily Mail that the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act prohibits businesses from publishing statements indicating services will be denied because of someone’s gender identity or gender expression.
Commission ruled the salon violated Michigan law
Following nearly three years of investigations and hearings, the Michigan Civil Rights Commission ruled that Studio 8 Hair Lab violated the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act.
The commission found that Geiger’s Facebook posts went beyond expressing a personal opinion because they publicly indicated transgender customers would not be served.
Commission Chair Luke Londo said the decision established an important legal precedent.
“This ruling sets the precedent that no business can publicly discriminate without consequence, whether it occurs face-to-face or over social media.”
The commission also found that Studio 8 qualifies as a place of public accommodation and is therefore subject to Michigan’s anti-discrimination laws.
Officials noted that Geiger’s Facebook posts did not cite religious beliefs as the basis for refusing transgender customers. They also said she had been notified of the hearings but chose not to participate.
The commission further ruled that the salon retaliated against the complainants after Geiger later sued them for reporting her Facebook posts to state officials.
Salon ordered to remove posts and complete training
As part of the ruling, Studio 8 Hair Lab must remove the Facebook posts and refrain from publishing similar statements in the future.
The salon must also provide services to customers regardless of their gender identity or gender expression.
Within 120 days, Geiger must complete anti-discrimination training and display a notice inside the salon explaining Michigan’s anti-discrimination law.
In addition, the salon has been ordered to publish a statement on its Facebook page acknowledging that it must comply with the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act.
The required statement reads: “Studio 8 Hair Salon is a place of public accommodation under the Michigan Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act.”
It continues, “We are obligated and intend to comply… by providing our goods and services to all prospective and current clients and customers without regard to their gender identity or gender expression.”
The commission also ordered Studio 8 to pay the complainants’ legal costs and attorney fees. An administrative law judge will determine the exact amount.
Information about the ruling will also be shared with Michigan’s Board of Cosmetology, which could decide whether disciplinary action should be taken against Geiger’s professional license.
Geiger plans to appeal the decision
Geiger’s attorney, David Delaney, said the salon intends to challenge the ruling in court.
He argued that the case concerns speech rather than discriminatory conduct.
“This case is about what someone said. Not what someone did.”
Delaney also argued that no customer was ever denied an actual haircut or salon service.
“Speech is not an act of discrimination.”
According to Delaney, Geiger is a Christian who believes God created only men and women and wanted her salon to reflect those beliefs.
He also argued that Studio 8 was prevented from fully asserting its constitutional rights related to free speech, freedom of religion, and a jury trial.
State officials rejected that argument, saying the case was not about Geiger’s personal beliefs but about publicly advertising that certain customers would not be served.
Studio 8 has 30 days to appeal the commission’s decision in circuit court.
If no appeal is filed, the Michigan Attorney General’s Office could seek a court order requiring the salon to comply with the ruling.
The dispute followed Michigan’s expanded LGBTQ+ protections
The legal dispute began shortly after Michigan expanded civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ people.
Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed legislation adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act.
Although those amendments officially took effect in February 2024, state officials noted that Michigan courts had already interpreted the law as protecting people from discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
The Michigan Civil Rights Commission first adopted that interpretation in 2018.
A Michigan Court of Claims judge upheld protections for gender identity in 2020, and the Michigan Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that discrimination based on sexual orientation was also prohibited under the law.
Separately, Studio 8 sued the three complainants in 2023 in an effort to halt the civil rights proceedings.
A judge dismissed that lawsuit in 2024, calling it frivolous and concluding it had been filed to intimidate or retaliate against the complainants.
That separate appeal remains pending before the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Share this with others so they can keep up with the latest news.
READ MORE
