\n Dallas Official Wanted Darker Big Tex – Resurfaced Video | Image of Big Tex (2022) by Leena Robinson\/Shutterstock <\/p>\n
A video from a 2025 Dallas City Council Parks, Trails, and the Environment Committee meeting has resurfaced, showing then-Councilmember Carolyn King Arnold questioning State Fair of Texas officials about changing the skin tone of the iconic Big Tex statue.<\/p>\n
In the exchange, Arnold asked<\/a> whether Big Tex could receive \u201ca more diverse reflection of the melatonin\u201d (a reference to melanin) to appear more inclusive, including the possibility of an African American or light brown face.<\/p>\n The video, posted<\/a> on X on July 23, 2026, by accounts including @amuse, has drawn significant online attention.<\/p>\n RACISM? Dallas leaders want Big Tex to become black or at least light brown. Would they change his voice and diction too? Why not make him gay or even trans? pic.twitter.com\/LGJIYIg8LG<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 @amuse (@amuse) July 24, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n No changes to Big Tex\u2019s skin tone have been made, and the State Fair has continued with the statue\u2019s traditional design.<\/p>\n The meeting occurred on January 6, 2025, according to the official City of Dallas video<\/a> archive. Arnold, who represented District 4 and left office in June 2025 due to term limits, directed her comments to State Fair of Texas representatives, including President Mitchell Glieber. <\/p>\n \u201cCan he be tanned?\u201d<\/strong> Arnold asked, adding, \u201cWe need to know if we can get a more diverse reflection of the melatonin of Big Tex. Is it a problem with him looking like he\u2019s perhaps an African American face? You know what I\u2019m saying? It\u2019s a tanning process. How do y\u2019all get to that decision so we can look like we\u2019re more inclusive and diverse?\u201d <\/strong><\/p>\n Arnold also referenced a \u201clight brown\u201d version and invoked Beyonc\u00e9 in the discussion. State Fair officials noted that Big Tex was rebuilt<\/a> after a 2012 fire to match historical specifications and indicated they would look into the decision-making process.\u00a0<\/p>\n Big Tex, the 55-foot cowboy statue that has greeted State Fair of Texas visitors since 1952, has undergone multiple updates<\/a> over the decades, including a full rebuild after the 2012 fire. Its traditional light-skinned appearance has remained consistent. <\/p>\n The State Fair announced<\/a> on July 22, 2026, new wardrobe partnerships with Cavender\u2019s Boot City and Resistol for 2026 but no alterations to facial features or skin tone.<\/strong><\/p>\n Broader Context of Race-Based Policies<\/p>\n During the Biden administration, the federal government expanded diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives across agencies, contractors, and education. Executive orders<\/a> and agency guidance encouraged race-conscious approaches in hiring, contracting, and program design.\u00a0When Donald Trump became President of the United States for his second term in 2025, many of these race-based preferences were scaled back or placed under heightened legal scrutiny.<\/p>\n For example, in 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard<\/a> and a companion case that race-based affirmative action in college admissions violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The Court held that such programs discriminated on the basis of race. <\/p>\n In June 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services<\/a>. The Court rejected a heightened evidentiary standard that some lower courts had applied to \u201creverse discrimination\u201d claims brought by members of majority groups under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote the opinion, stating that Title VII does not impose a different burden on majority-group plaintiffs.<\/p>\n Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurrence joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, noted<\/a> that DEI initiatives \u201chave often led to overt discrimination against those perceived to be in the majority.\u201d <\/strong><\/p>\n The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has stated<\/a> that Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race and that DEI initiatives can violate the law if they involve race-based decision-making, such as limiting opportunities or using race as a selection criterion.<\/p>\n In one recent federal investigation, announced on July 20, 2026, the Justice Department examined<\/a> practices at a medical school<\/strong> involving race-based adjustments in admissions reviews.<\/p>\n The Justice Department found that UC San Diego School of Medicine favored Black and Hispanic applicants<\/strong> (labeled \u201cunderrepresented minorities in medicine\u201d) through manipulated processes and proxies, while discriminating against white and Asian applicants<\/strong> by denying them admission in favor of lower-credentialed candidates from the preferred groups.<\/p>\n \u201cRather than rely on MCAT scores or GPA, San Diego Med\u2019s shadow application process unlawfully judged applicants for admission based on their race,\u201d said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department\u2019s Civil Rights Division, per the press release<\/a>. \u201cSan Diego Med\u2019s blatant efforts to prioritize race are illegal, and we will end these practices.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Arnold\u2019s comments from the January 6, 2025, committee meeting remain part of the public record.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n
\n