The Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in the case of Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, removing a stricter rule that lower courts had been using in reverse discrimination cases. The decision, written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, changes how employment discrimination claims from members of majority groups will be handled in the future.
The case involved Marlean Ames, a longtime employee of the Ohio Department of Youth Services (ODYS). After working there for ten years, Ames was promoted to run a program focused on preventing prison rape. However, when she applied for another promotion in 2019, she was turned down. ODYS claimed she lacked vision and leadership skills, even though Ames had plenty of experience and qualifications, per the NY Times.
According to The Hill, the job went to a gay woman who had less seniority and no college degree. Soon after, Ames was removed from her current position, offered a lower-ranking job with a big pay cut, and replaced by a gay man with less seniority. Ames then filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, arguing she had faced sex discrimination. She based her claim on a 2020 Supreme Court ruling that said discrimination based on sexual orientation counts as sex discrimination under Title VII.
Courts rule in favor of woman in discrimination case
However, lower courts threw out her case, pointing to a special rule they had created called a “heightened standard.” These courts said that plaintiffs from majority groups, like Ames, had to not only show the usual signs of discrimination but also prove “background circumstances,” suggesting the employer was unusually likely to discriminate against the majority. The lower courts decided Ames did not meet this extra requirement.
The Supreme Court completely rejected this added rule. The justices found nothing in the text of Title VII that supported treating majority and minority groups differently. They stressed that the law protects everyone, no matter whether they are part of a majority or minority group. The Court made it clear that the rules for proving workplace discrimination are the same for all plaintiffs, regardless of which group they belong to.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court sided unanimously with a straight white woman in Ohio who filed a “reverse discrimination” lawsuit after her g*y boss refused to promote her and instead promoted her g*y colleagues.
— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) June 5, 2025
CNN’s Paula Reid: “This is a unanimous opinion that will make it… pic.twitter.com/C9HliKdBZC
The supreme court has been on the news a lot recently. The Supreme Court has blocked an order from Trump, which has also made an effect on the divide between democratic and conservative members of congress.
This decision will have a major impact on future reverse discrimination cases. Getting rid of the “heightened standard” makes it easier for majority-group plaintiffs to win their claims under Title VII. It also simplifies the legal process, ensuring the law is applied the same way in all discrimination cases.
The case drew a lot of attention from different legal groups. Conservative legal organizations supported Ames, and the Biden administration also filed a brief backing her. On the other side, groups like the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund and the National Association of Counties filed briefs supporting Ohio’s position.
Justice Clarence Thomas, in a separate opinion joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, raised concerns about the overall system used to judge employment discrimination claims, which comes from a 1973 Supreme Court ruling. He suggested this system might be outdated and not working well, making it harder to fairly and efficiently decide such cases. Thomas called for a fresh look at this system, saying that rules created by judges can twist the meaning of laws, create unnecessary hurdles, and cause confusion.
