The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Ames v. Ohio reaffirms that Equal Employment Opportunity protection under Title VII applies to all employees of a protected class, WITHOUT distinguishing between majority or minority groups.
The “reverse” discrimination case (see SCOTUS to Hear Reverse Discrimination Case) centered on the requirement that majority group plaintiffs must meet heightened evidentiary standards – known as the background circumstances test – to prove discrimination under Title VII, standards.
The test required plaintiffs in majority groups (straight sexual orientation in this case) alleging employment discrimination show evidence of statistical patterns of discrimination against the majority in the workplace or that a minority group member made the adverse employment decision.
- The Ames case began at the district court, where summary judgement was granted to the Ohio Department, finding Ames failed to meet the background circumstances test – no statistical evidence of anti-heterosexual discrimination – and the decision makers in her case were straight.
- Next stop, the appeals court affirmed the dismissal, acknowledging that while Ames met the requirement for showing a prima facia case of discrimination (i.e. she was qualified, applied, was rejected, and the role went to someone outside of her protected class), she nonetheless could not prove background circumstances suggesting the employer had a pattern of discriminating against the majority.
- Finally, last fall the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the case, and in a 9-0 ruling, June 5, 2025, found that the background circumstances test is inconsistent with Title VII’s text and U.S. Supreme Court precedents, vacating the decision and remanding the case back to the lower courts to reassess the case without considering the background circumstances test.
The Court’s opinion made clear that “Title VII prohibits discrimination against any individual based on protected characteristics of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, including sexual orientation WITHOUT distinguishing between majority or minority groups…“Imposing a heightened standard on majority-group plaintiffs violates the statute’s equal application.”
Majority group plaintiffs now face the same evidentiary burden as minority-group plaintiffs under Title VII, which may give rise to more employees bringing “reverse” discrimination claims against their employers in light of the current DEI initiative environment.
Contact Our Employment Discrimination Lawyers for Help
If you have been discriminated against in your workplace i.e., suffered retaliation, harassment or were subject to an adverse employment action such as lack of promotion, demotion, or job termination, and are a member of a protected class, contact the employment law attorneys of Alan C. Olson & Associates for immediate assistance at 262-785-9606.
