A Michigan hair salon owner who told transgender customers to “seek services at a local pet groomer instead” has lost a lengthy legal battle over comments she made on social media.
The Michigan Civil Rights Commission ruled that Studio 8 Hair Lab violated the state’s anti-discrimination law after owner Christine Geiger posted on Facebook in 2023 that transgender people were “not welcome” at her salon.
As part of the ruling, the commission ordered the salon to remove the posts, serve customers regardless of their gender identity, complete anti-discrimination training, and publish a statement acknowledging its legal responsibilities under Michigan law.
“Speech is one thing, but telling people they aren’t welcome at your business is another,” one social media user wrote.
Facebook posts sparked dozens of complaints
The case began in July 2023 after Geiger shared several Facebook posts targeting transgender people.
One post stated: “If a human identifies as anything other than a man/woman, please seek services at a local pet groomer.”
The post continued: “You are not welcome at this salon. Period.”
Geiger also wrote that if customers requested employees use their preferred pronouns, staff might simply refer to them as “hey you.”
In another post, she argued that, as a small business owner, she had the right to refuse service.
“This is America; free speech. This small business has the right to refuse services,” she wrote.
She also criticized Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and legislation expanding civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ individuals.
The posts quickly spread online and prompted widespread backlash.
Between July and November 2023, the Michigan Department of Civil Rights received more than 20 complaints. Three of those complaints ultimately became the basis of the state’s legal case.
Although none of the complainants had attempted to book an appointment, state officials said Michigan law also prohibits businesses from publicly indicating that protected groups are unwelcome.
Katie Adraianse, spokesperson for the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, said the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act bars businesses from publishing statements suggesting they will deny services based on a person’s gender identity or gender expression.
Commission says the salon violated state law
After nearly three years of investigations and hearings, the Michigan Civil Rights Commission concluded that Studio 8 Hair Lab violated the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act.
The commission determined that Geiger’s Facebook posts went beyond expressing personal opinions because they publicly signaled that transgender customers would not be served.
Commission Chair Luke Londo said the ruling establishes an important legal precedent.
“This ruling makes clear that businesses cannot publicly discriminate without consequences, whether that happens in person or on social media,” he said.
The commission also ruled that Studio 8 is a place of public accommodation and is therefore required to comply with Michigan’s anti-discrimination laws.
Officials noted that Geiger’s Facebook posts did not cite religious beliefs as the reason for refusing transgender customers. They also said she was notified of the hearings but chose not to participate.
In addition, the commission found 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
Under the commission’s order, Studio 8 Hair Lab must delete the Facebook posts and avoid 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 is required to complete anti-discrimination training and display a notice inside the salon explaining Michigan’s anti-discrimination law.
The salon must also publish a statement on its Facebook page acknowledging that it is legally required to comply with the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act by serving all customers without discrimination based on gender identity or gender expression.
In addition, the commission ordered Studio 8 to cover the complainants’ legal costs and attorney fees. An administrative law judge will determine the final amount.
Information about the ruling will also be forwarded to Michigan’s Board of Cosmetology, which may decide whether disciplinary action should be taken against Geiger’s professional license.
Owner plans to appeal
Geiger’s attorney, David Delaney, said the salon intends to appeal the decision.
He argued that the case centers on protected speech rather than discriminatory actions.
“This case is about what someone said, not what someone did,” Delaney said.
He also noted that no customer was ever turned away or denied a haircut.
According to Delaney, Geiger is a Christian who believes God created only men and women and wanted her business to reflect those beliefs.
He further argued that Studio 8 was prevented from fully asserting its constitutional rights related to free speech, religious freedom, and a jury trial.
State officials disagreed, 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.
Case followed expanded LGBTQ+ protections
The dispute arose shortly after Michigan expanded civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ residents.
Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed legislation adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act.
Although those changes officially took effect in February 2024, state officials said 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 stop the civil rights proceedings.
A judge dismissed that lawsuit in 2024, calling it frivolous and concluding it was intended to intimidate or retaliate against the complainants. That appeal is still pending before the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Share this story with others so they can stay informed about the latest developments.