On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 145 S. Ct. 1540 (2025), making clear that an employee-plaintiff who is a member of a majority group cannot be held to a higher evidentiary standard to succeed on a Title VII discrimination claim.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against employees because of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. In Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), extended this protection to include sexual orientation and gender identity. “Reverse discrimination” is a term that describes discrimination against individuals from majority groups.
In Ames, the employee-plaintiff, Marlean Ames (“Ames”), a heterosexual woman, alleged that she was denied a promotion and subsequently demoted because of her sex and sexual orientation in violation of Title VII.
Ames worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services and applied for the position of Bureau Chief of Quality Assurance and Improvement. Despite positive performance reviews, she was passed over for a position in favor of a gay woman. She was also demoted from her role as Prison Rape Elimination Act Coordinator to her former position and replaced by a gay male. Notably, the decision to demote her was made by heterosexual individuals.
Ames sued under Title VII, and the district court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer. Following, Ames appealed to the Sixth Circuit. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision and held that a plaintiff-employee who is a member of a majority group, like Ames, must show “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority” to meet their burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination.
Until Ames, there was a split in the circuit courts, where some circuit courts had adopted this “background circumstances” rule for “reverse discrimination” claims. Essentially, a plaintiff-employee could only satisfy his or her prima facie burden of discrimination by showing “background circumstances.” Ames appealed to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court reversed the Sixth Circuit’s decision. Accordingly, the Supreme Court has now resolved the split in the circuit courts.
In its long-awaited unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff-employee who is a member of a majority group does not have to show “background circumstances” to satisfy his or her burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination.
Now, all plaintiff-employees, regardless of their membership in a majority or minority group, must be treated under the same framework, where a plaintiff-employee must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination before the burden shifts back to the employer to state a legitimate-nondiscriminatory reason for its employment decision. The Supreme Court has clarified that majority-group employees are entitled to the same Title VII protections.
What This Means for Employers
This decision reinforces that Title VII protects majority-class members and minority-class members equally. However, this ruling does not eliminate defenses available to employers when a discrimination claim is lodged against them. In other words, an employer can articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the employment decision, and the burden ultimately remains with the employee to prove that the stated reason was a pretext for discrimination.
How Employers Can Minimize Risk:
1. Review and Audit Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies to ensure you are not overtly discriminating against majority-group employees
2. Apply the Same Standards to All Employees – Employment decisions should be made on legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons and employers should avoid any practices that apply different standards to different classes.
3. Train Human Resources and Management on the equal application of Title VII protections, including reverse discrimination claims.
4. Keep Documentation – Throughout an employee’s employment, document everything. If a decision is made to hire, promote, discipline, or terminate an employee, you should write the reasons why you made that decision. If a discrimination claim is filed against you, it will help to demonstrate a non-discriminatory intent behind your decision.
5. Always Stay Informed – It is important to monitor developments in federal and state law to ensure compliance.
