District Three (3) Cosmetology Board Member Lauren Delahoussaye Quinlan.
As we reported in this August 27, 2025 feature entailing an alleged “pandemic” of gifts (a/k/a “bribes”) being solicited by Louisiana State Board of Cosmetology (LSBC) inspectors, there was an initial euphoria among Vietnamese manicurists upon seeing that Gov. Jeff Landry prevailed in his quest for Governor in 2023 without there even being a need for a runoff.
The celebratory mood only magnified once Lauren Delahoussaye Quinlan was appointed to the LSBC to represent District 3. That District parallels the Congressional District 3, presently represented by U. S. Congressman Clay Higgins. As noted on the “bribes” link above, it was a Broussard, Louisiana nail salon (Nail Tech) for which the $200 in mysterious cash surfaced in an envelope along with a notation of “thank you.”
The LSBC responded with this April 4, 2025 certified letter indicating that payment of “cash gifts” is “highly unethical.”
Several well-informed sources with very integral knowledge of the LSBC’s operations have described the Acadiana area (Landry’s home base) as a “field ripe for the picking” regarding the obtaining of such payments. In fact, we’ve been told that inspectors’ supervisors have become very upset with the sheer level of such “gifts” because, when combined with the salaries of the inspectors, the resulting total compensation exceeds that of the supervisors! While we’ve made no independent verification of that fact, as we just stated, those sentiments have been expressed by historically reliable sources we’ve maintained within the Louisiana cosmetology industry for a rather protracted period.
On September 9, 2025 we reported upon several Vietnamese manicurists having filed for a Declaratory Order to be issued by the LSBC. The essence of that Declaratory Order seeks for the LSBC to acknowledge that manicurists accused of wrongdoing by the LSBC have the Constitutional Right to a trial by jury rather than the LSBC serving as “judge, jury, and executioner.” In that feature, we also revealed just how frustrated the manicurist plaintiffs have become that the LSBC has dragged its heels on issuing any such Declaratory Order.
The LSBC successfully stalled the process for over a year by seeking an opinion from Louisiana AG Liz Murill’s Office regarding whether the LSBC has authority to make any ruling on any such “Constitutional Right,” or whether only a “court of competent jurisdiction” can make such a ruling. In our eyes, and we expressed this many times, seeking an AG Opinion was not an appropriate act because Murrill would have a very obvious conflict in issuing any such opinion given that it’s her job to defend the LSBC in any litigation that may arise over the matter.
If AG Murrill issued an opinion that the Board possesses such jurisdiction to issue a Declaratory Order, she’d become “boxed in” regarding any litigation over the whole matter. Even if she issued an opinion that the Board lacked jurisdiction to issue such an Order, she would still be boxed in on her opinion in any such litigation involving the subject matter (though that scenario would likely not be nearly as awkward for Murrill).
It was therefore our opinion that, notwithstanding the repeated indications by LSBC attorney Sheri Morris that an opinion would be “forthcoming soon,” and further that she had requested “expedited consideration” of the matter, Murrill was never (repeat never) going to issue such an Opinion. Furthermore, we firmly believe that Morris and the LSBC Members knew that full well when they requested the AG Opinion. We therefore concluded the following at the bottom of the above-linked feature:
So, with allegations of rampant solicitations of bribes by LSBC inspectors along with a well documented decade long period of alleged harassment by the LSBC to include a Federal Judge stating the LSBC engaged in Constitutional Rights violations (false imprisonment and illegal searches), Cao and the Pelican Institute can either: #1) continue to wait on the AG opinion which was supposed to be issued months ago, or #2) proceed on with litigation in 19th JDC without any Declaratory Order by the LSBC or an opinion by the AG regarding whether the Board has the authority to issue such an Order.
Seventy-six (76) days later, On Monday, November 24, 2025, the Plaintiffs opted for Option # 2 above and filed this lawsuit (Writ of Mandamus) against Quinlan, her six colleagues, and the Board itself. Thus, with all of the euphoria over Landry’s election and, most especially, the subsequent appointment of Lauren Delahoussaye Quinlan to represent District 3 on the LSBC, those high hopes and expectations have now been reduced down to the act of filing suit against the very appointees Landry placed on the LSBC inclusive of Quinlan, to try and obtain the relief they were so optimistic of receiving under a Landry administration.
Anyone is welcome to read the 454-page lawsuit (with Exhibits), however, let’s sum it up succinctly: The law says the Board shall hear within 60 days after receipt and thereafter rule within 30 days, and we seek a Court Order via Mandamus for them to do so.
So, notwithstanding all of the euphoria over Governor Landry’s election night victory and the belief that relief from what Vietnamese nail salon practitioners have characterized as a highly oppressive regulatory Board in the LSBC, with that euphoria only expanded upon the appointment of Board Member Lauren Delahoussaye Quinlin, that euphoria has ratcheted down to an all-time low in having little choice but to file suit against the very LSBC appointees Gov. Landry appointed to the LSBC.
We should also point out that, while the litigation sues the LSBC members only in their capacities as Board Members (thus insulating them from personal liability), this suit and, in our humble opinion, more lawsuits which are going to follow (more on that shortly) only serve as a spotlight as to why the Louisiana Attorney General’s Office advised the LSBC to enroll in its program offering personal liability protection.
The LSBC Members actually had to convene a special meeting on Monday, January 13, 2025 for the sole purpose of enrolling in that program after former LSBC Executive Director Steve Young strongly advised against such enrollment only a week before in citing the approximate $120,000 annual cost.
The present litigation comes at a time of turmoil and upheaval within the LSBC. Notice in the preceding paragraph our use of the words “former LSBC Executive Director Steve Young.” We use those words because, contrary to what we perceived as no intention whatsoever to retire only a few short months ago, Young sought to be recognized at the October LSBC meeting to announce his retirement; however, due to impending quorum issues for that meeting, LSBC Chairman Jennifer Reed asked him to defer until the November 3, 2025 meeting.
At that meeting on Monday, November 3, 2025, Young did make his retirement announcement official in a very brief 30-second address to the LSBC Members:
11/3/25: Young bids a brief farewell to the LSBC Members as he announces his retirement effective Friday, November 28, 2025.
The LSBC went ahead and selected Young’s replacement at that meeting; however, the manner in which that replacement took place has raised more than a few eyebrows among long-time followers of the LSBC. Remember, we just stated that Young wanted to announce his retirement back in October. That would infer that the LSBC had ample time to contemplate his replacement and formally place the selection of his replacement on an agenda for public input.
Nevertheless, in what some observers have said was a “sneaky” move, the Board Members sought to add an item to the agenda (meaning it was not posted on the agenda), and that item entailed Board Chairman Jennifer Reed making the recommendation that Erin Grace Marceaux, longtime manager at Paul Mitchell School of Cosmetology and consistent LSBC meetings attendee, replace Steve Young. Here’s how that went down:
After amending the agenda (which really should have been done at the outset of the meeting), LSBC Chairman Jennifer Reed proposes having Erin Grace Marceaux be Steve Young’s successor as Executive Director of the LSBC.
So, we have the LSBC, fresh off obtaining a 40 percent license fee increase amounting to around $400,000 a year already having to expend funds to defend yet another lawsuit because the AG program does not cover defense costs of litigation such as that filed by the Vietnamese manicurists. As we’ve previously pointed out, the LSBC has spent $157,000 in legal fees fighting hair braiders who wish to practice without the LSBC’s burdensome barriers to entry designed to enrich cosmetology schools.
We already know precisely where newly appointed LSBC Executive Director Erin Marceaux stands entailing the deregulation of the hair braiding industry. In fact, on June 3, 2025, she distributed out this email rallying forces to show up and oppose last year’s hair braiding deregulation bill. From Marceaux’s email rallying cry:
Good evening,
Just an industry heads up to anyone who cares about deregulation in our industry and state- tomorrow all 3 bills pertaining to braiding and deregulation of “minor trimming” or using styling tools, etc. will be heard tomorrow. This will happen at 9:30am at the Senate Commerce Commitee. See attached agenda. If you want to show any interest in the deregulation that is proposed I am imploring you to show up tomorrow by 9am to the capital in Baton Rouge.
My apologies for the late notice, but as you know these things end up sneaking up. Feel free to connect with me privately via email if you’d like.
Thank you,
Erin Grace
Marceaux then showed up the next day to testify against the bill. Let’s take a brief look at Rep. Moore touting the bill followed by Marceaux pouring cold water on it:
6/4/25: After brief statements by Rep. Moore supporting her bill, HB-509, to deregulate the practice of hair braiding, Marceaux testifies against passage of the bill.
We believe that we can state with 100 percent certainty that another braiding deregulation bill will be filed in the 2026 Legislative Session and, beyond that, we believe a strong possibility exists that one or more hair braiders who no longer desire to perform their services underground may initiate litigation to obtain the ability to do so without the need for spending 500+ hours at a school such as Marceaux’s former employer.
Regarding any such future bill, Marceaux must now limit her role at the Legislature to a mere “provider of information;” however, it has been our observation that the LSBC, for the past 10 years, has had great difficulty even attempting to conceal the fact that it has been adamantinely opposed to any such deregulation of the hair braiding industry in Louisiana.
On a more optimistic note (because we see an exceedingly high probability of further litigation entailing hair braiders and the LSBC), newly appointed LSBC Member Jean Pitre emphasized his push for the LSBC to undergo a performance audit by the Louisiana Legislative Auditor’s Office early in 2026:
11/3/25: Pitre espouses the virtues of having the LSBC undergo a performance audit early in 2026.
Though we did not capture it on camera, we feel compelled to point out that, as Pitre was touting the positives of undergoing the performance audit, then-Executive Director Steve Young was shaking his head horizontally in disagreement with his commentary.
It would certainly be our hope and expectation that the Louisiana Legislative Auditor’s Office will strongly recommend that the LSBC outsource its licensing function.
We have already pointed out the fact that IT experts with whom we have consulted have indicated that sticking with the inhouse system is tantamount to flushing $700,000 in programming costs straight down a “rabbit hole.” Marceaux herself has espoused upon the deficiencies of the existing inhouse licensing system, and in her new role, we think we can be safe in stating that licensees are going to expect solutions to those shortcomings and not excuses, which has been all that her predecessor and his team have seemed to offer about the abysmal system that is in place now.
We have already provided actual contracts with outside vendors for other licensing boards such as the State Board of CPAs of Louisiana. Burns timed his renewal of his CPA-inactive certificate this year, and using his cell phone for the renewal, the process was again seamless and took just over four minutes, much of which was spent responding to questions such as if his address had changed, had he pled guilty or no contest to a felony, had he been the subject of any disciplinary action by a state licensing board, etc.
So, in conclusion on this latest lawsuit, we don’t think it’s a very good look that Vietnamese manicurists have wound up having to resort to suing the very appointees Gov. Landry made to the LSBC, but we think more bad looks are likely forthcoming entailing this particular occupational licensing board when it comes to future litigation.
CLICK HERE for the November 3, 2025 LSBC meeting in its entirety, including a segment from the 17:04 – 52:00 wherein Cosmetologist Tammie Fontayne really gave the LSBC members a piece of her mind regarding being charged attorney fees for what she alleges was “no work” by any attorney, instead arguing that she (Fontayne) had to do all of the work herself.
Finally, we would remind anyone who may wish to attend the LSBC meeting for tomorrow (Monday, December 1, 2025) that Member Rene Bosworth has succeeded in having the Board meet at a new venue, so let us place the address of the meeting venue below as a reminder in the hope that nobody shows up at the LSBC headquarters for the meeting (and, for the record, we salute Bosworth’s efforts because the LSBC Boardroom has been a horrendously bad venue for conducting the meetings):
Department of Wildlife and Fisheries
2000 Quail Drive, Baton Rouge, LA 70808