The United States Supreme Court issued a ruling in in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services on June 5, 2025, reviving a lawsuit brought by a heterosexual female employee who claimed she was discriminated against by her employer in favor of less qualified gay candidates. The Court’s unanimous opinion held that the burden of proof in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases is the same for all cases regardless of the race, gender, or sexual orientation of the employee bringing the claim.
Background of the case
Marlean Ames, who identifies as a straight woman, worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services for over 15 years. In 2019, Ms. Ames applied and interviewed for a newly created position with the agency, but the Department hired a lesbian woman instead. A few days later, the Department told Ms. Ames that she was not getting the promotion she hoped for, was being demoted to her original secretarial position, and stripped of the pay raise that she got with her prior promotion. The agency then put a newly hired candidate, a gay man, into Ms. Ames’s former job. Ms. Ames sued the Department under Title VII, alleging she was denied promotionand demoted because of her sexual orientation—heterosexual. Ms. Ames lost at the trial court and again at the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal appellate court that hears cases from Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Michigan. The lower courts dismissed her case because she could not show that the Department was “that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.” They reasoned that, as a straight woman, Ms. Ames was required to prove additional facts to bring her discrimination claims.
The Supreme Court Opinion
The Supreme Court ruled that the anti-discrimination protections in Title VII apply to every individual without regard to that individual’s membership in a minority or majority group. The Court’s decision explained that a plaintiff’s burden in the early stages of their case is not a high bar and once they show some proof of discrimination, the court must look at whether the employer can show its decision was not discriminatory. Now Ms. Ames’s case goes back to the trial court.
Takeaway
Title VII prohibits any discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, or color...no matter whether you are a member of a so-called majority group or minority-group.