Where it All Began

Originating from African Americans from New York in the 1930s, a zoot suit, also sometimes spelled ‘zuit suit,’ is a men’s suit with high-waisted, wide-legged, pegged trousers and a long coat with wide lapels and wide padded shoulders. It had connections to jazz music, dance, and overall connections to African American popular culture. This style later became popular amongst other minority groups, specifically Mexican Americans who labeled themselves as pachucos, a name that was linked to rebellion against Mexican and American cultures. The zoot suit thus became an integral symbol of cultural pride amongst minorities in Los Angeles, granting them the ability to demonstrate their shared history through their culturally influenced outfits. 

The Origin of Mexican-Americans and their Relationship with White Angelenos

To understand how the racialization of the zoot suit began, one must understand the history of Mexico’s relationship with the state. California was originally part of Mexico for nearly three decades, then became part of the United States following the Mexican-American War. Thus, there had always been a large Mexican-American community within the state. However, during the Great Depression, over 500,000 people of Mexican descent were deported, including citizens, to Mexico. By the end of the 1930s, only about three million Mexican Americans were left, and they were highly concentrated in the Los Angeles area. As World War II began, a million-dollar Naval training school was put into the Chavez Ravine, a primarily working-class, immigrant area for Mexican-Americans. As the neighborhood grew agitated with this new installment, it would lead to a rise in tension between sailors and Mexican-Americans, which would ultimately lead to the riots. 

The Zoot-Suit Riots

As noted earlier, the zoot suit was extremely popularized during the 1940s, and many Mexican Americans could be seen wearing it proudly in the Los Angeles area. The conflict between sailors and Mexican Americans continued to rise, leading to increased tensions between the two groups. By 1942, the War Production Board regulated the manufacturing of all clothing, including suits, that contained wool due to a shortage of resources. However, this did not stop the demand for the zoot suit—Mexican Americans still proudly wore these outfits, and white Americans were not happy about this, deeming it “unpatriotic.” Continuing to use divisive language only created a more apparent physical divide, which eventually reached a breaking point.

On June 3, 1943, a group of sailors claimed they were attacked by a group of Mexican American “zoot-suiters,” creating a negative connotation around the outfits. This term later became recognized as a slur, underscoring its harmful representation of Mexican-Americans. As a result of this, sailors began targeting the Mexican American community, solely seeking out individuals in zoot suits. Ultimately, Mexican Americans were beaten and stripped of their suits, some sailors going as far as to urinate on them. An article went as far as to explain how to “de-zoot” a zoot-suiter, claiming that the clothing should be burned once stripped. The media continued to use racially charged language to describe Mexican-Americans in zoot-suits, specifically using the terms “thug” and “delinquents.” Throughout the riots, no officers took the initiative to end the beating; instead, they allowed white Angelenos the opportunity to beat Mexican-Americans, fueling racial tension and divide. This underscores the attitude of our police officers today; we continue to see a lack of defense and support for our Black and Latino youth, allowing for violence to persist.

Conclusion

While no one was killed during the riots, they stood as a symbol of white violence against Mexican Americans, highlighting racial tensions that continue to manifest in today’s political climate. The Zoot Suit Riots were not random acts of aggression but intentional attacks meant to terrorize a marginalized community, underscoring the intersection of culture, fashion, and systemic racism. In the end, more Mexican Americans than servicemen were arrested, revealing the deeply racialized response to the conflict.

The zoot suit, once a proud expression of cultural identity and minority resistance, became a target—evidence that fashion can be politicized and weaponized. Today, we continue to witness the racialization of clothing, particularly among Black and Latino communities. Durags, streetwear, and other culturally significant styles are often viewed through a biased lens that criminalizes or devalues the people who wear them. While communities of color use fashion to celebrate heritage and assert visibility, dominant social and legal structures often pathologize their self-expression. 

Despite these challenges, we can point to moments of celebration in our recent times. For instance, this year’s Met Gala theme—Superfine Tailoring: Black Style—offered a platform for Black fashion to be honored and embraced by some of the biggest names in fashion. Events like this provide opportunities for cultural fashion to receive positive recognition and allow minority communities to feel pride in their heritage. Ultimately, the Zoot Suit Riots remind us that fashion is inherently political—and that embracing its cultural power should never be a source of shame, even when doing so is difficult.