Amy Cao et al. v. Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology

The Story

The right to a trial by jury is one of the cornerstones of American liberty, enshrined in the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution. This safeguard ensures that the government cannot deprive citizens of their property or livelihood without due process in a court of law. Yet, for licensed professionals in Louisiana, like manicurists and nail salon owners, this fundamental right is effectively denied when state regulators impose steep fines or revoke licenses through internal proceedings rather than in a courtroom.

In Louisiana, the Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology (LSBC) oversees the licensing and regulation of cosmetologists, including conducting frequent inspections and issuing fines for violations. The fines imposed by the LSBC can quickly escalate, starting at $25 per infraction and often ballooning to $300 per day for ongoing violations. For manicurists and salon owners—many of whom are lower-income workers—these penalties can amount to thousands of dollars, placing them in financial jeopardy. To make matters worse, these fines are levied without any meaningful recourse, as hearings are held before the LSBC itself—the same entity that conducts inspections and issues the penalties.

During the July 2023 to June 2024 period, every single LSBC enforcement action resulted in a monetary fine. Not a single case was tied to customer complaints or threats to public health and safety, underscoring a system where the Board’s self-funding through fines becomes a driving force for enforcement. This practice reflects a conflict of interest, incentivizing the Board to impose fines aggressively rather than ensuring justice is served.

To uphold the Constitution and protect the rights of licensed professionals, cosmetologists Amy Cao, Hien Hoang, Jan Thoa Nguyen, Linda Ho, and manicurist Bich Doan Vo are taking a stand. Represented by the Pelican Institute, the Pacific Legal Foundation, and Cao Law Firm, they are challenging the LSBC’s tribunal system in a lawsuit that seeks to guarantee the right to a trial by jury when the state imposes financial penalties. This case aims to affirm that no individual should be at the mercy of a state regulatory board without the protection of a jury of their peers.