Supreme Court sides with straight woman in 'reverse discrimination' case
- The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday in favor of Marlean Ames, an Ohio woman who alleges she was passed over for a job advancement and subsequently demoted due to her heterosexual orientation.
- After more than two decades with Ohio's juvenile corrections agency, Ames filed a lawsuit claiming she faced discrimination because of her heterosexuality, arguing that favoritism toward LGBTQ coworkers hindered her career advancement.
- Lower courts required majority group plaintiffs like Ames to show additional 'background circumstances' of discrimination, which she failed to provide, prompting Supreme Court review.
- The court ruled the standard of proof must be equal for all discrimination claims, effectively lowering the burden of proof and making it easier to file reverse discrimination lawsuits.
- The decision alters legal standards in 20 states and Washington, D.C., potentially increasing reverse discrimination lawsuits filed by majority groups such as white or heterosexual individuals.
244 Articles
244 Articles
Discrimination: Expanding the definition
"Reverse discrimination" lawsuits will now be "easier to bring," said Noah Feldman in Bloomberg. The Supreme Court last week ruled unanimously in favor of a woman who argued she was discriminated against for being straight. In Ames v. Ohio, Marlean Ames claimed her gay boss at the Ohio Department of Youth Services promoted a lesbian with less experience over her. She was later demoted and replaced by a gay man with less seniority. Ames argued th…
West Central Tribune
Noah Feldman: ‘Reverse discrimination’ ruling is a win for the rule of law
White individuals and straight people do not need to meet a higher burden of proof than members of minority groups to prevail in employment discrimination suits, the Supreme Court held June 5. The immediate effect is to make so-called “reverse discrimination” claims easier to bring. However, the decision also solidifies the existing legal framework for workplace discrimination — a framework that the court’s ultra-conservative justices would like…
Progressive Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson hammers nail into DEI coffin
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services didn’t dominate the headlines – but it should have. In a unanimous ruling, the Court quietly dismantled a legal fiction that has distorted civil rights law for decades. And in a twist no one saw coming, the opinion was authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the progressive icon of the bench. At the heart of Ames was a question few Americans knew they needed to a…
David French: Justice Jackson just helped reset the DEI debate
At the heart of the debate over diversity, equity and inclusion is a question: How much should the law treat a person as an individual rather than as a member of a group? For a very long time, American law and American institutions answered that question unequivocally. People were defined primarily by the group they belonged to, and if they happened to be Black or Native American or a woman, they were going to enjoy fewer rights, fewer privilege…
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 49% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
