News & Analysis as of

Title VII › Supreme Court of the United States › Employees

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII... more +
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII has been subsequently extended to discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and sexual stereotypes and to prohibit sexual harassment. Title VII applies to all employers with fifteen or more employees including private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions.  less -
Perkins Coie

June Tip of the Month: Supreme Court Decision Levels the Playing Field for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Perkins Coie on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that members of a majority group are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard to prevail...more

Downey Brand LLP

Employers May See an Increase in Title VII Discrimination Claims

Downey Brand LLP on

Recently, the Supreme Court issued an opinion that lowered the bar for employees seeking to sue their employer. In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a heterosexual white woman claimed that she suffered discrimination...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Timing Is Everything: SCOTUS Shuts Down Retiree’s ADA Post-Employment Benefits Claim

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

Do former employees have the right to sue their previous employer under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination in the administration of post-employment fringe benefits? Resolving a circuit...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Reverse Discrimination Lawsuits Are So Back

Ballard Spahr LLP on

On June 5, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court eliminated the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard for majority plaintiffs (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) who claim discrimination under Title VII (also known as reverse...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Water Cooler Talk: ‘Late Night’ Shows DEI Is More Than Optics

Troutman Pepper Locke on

The 2019 film “Late Night,” written by and starring Mindy Kaling, tells the story of a late-night talk show host, Katherine Newbury, played by Emma Thompson, whose all-male, all-white writing staff scrambles to add a female...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

SCOTUS Just Made it Easier for Employees to Bring “Reverse Discrimination” Lawsuits

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Sixth Circuit’s rule, which required plaintiffs of a majority group to satisfy an additional burden as part of establishing a prima facie case of Title...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Supreme Court Strikes Down Sixth Circuit Rule Heightening Discrimination Standard for Members of Majority Groups

Troutman Pepper Locke on

A recent Supreme Court decision clarified that discrimination claims brought by members of majority groups in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases cannot be subject to a heightened evidentiary burden. In Ames v. Ohio...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Standard for Reverse Discrimination Suits Under Title VII

Quarles & Brady LLP on

In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Supreme Court last Thursday held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) imposes no additional requirements on majority-group...more

Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani

SCOTUS Unanimously Rejects Heightened Burden for Majority-Group Discrimination Claims

Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of petitioner, Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, who commenced a reverse discrimination case against her former employer, the Ohio Department of Youth...more

Bracewell LLP

Employees in the “Majority” Do Not Have Higher Burden When Proving Discrimination Says Unanimous Supreme Court

Bracewell LLP on

In a case filed by a heterosexual woman claiming she was discriminated against due to her sexual orientation, a unanimous United States Supreme Court held that she should not be required to meet a higher standard to prove...more

Blank Rome LLP

Breaking—Supreme Court Unanimously Lowers Bar for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims: Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services...

Blank Rome LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark, unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 605 U.S. ___ (2025) on June 5, 2025, fundamentally altering the landscape for “reverse discrimination” claims under...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Makes It Easier for Employees to Prove “Reverse Discrimination”

Amundsen Davis LLC on

Hune 5th, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in the case of Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, that “the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a...more

Payne & Fears

SCOTUS Eases the Standard for Reverse Discrimination Claims Under Title VII

Payne & Fears on

Today, in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the Supreme Court unanimously held that in order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group does not...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Prima Facie “Background Circumstances” Test for Majority Group Plaintiffs

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court vacated the dismissal of a heterosexual woman’s Title VII claims, concluding that she was improperly subjected to a heightened prima facie standard that required her to show...more

Gould + Ratner LLP

Ames Analysis: Reverse Discrimination Reversed

Gould + Ratner LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, striking down the “background circumstances” requirement in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases. The Court held...more

Rumberger | Kirk

From Hamilton To Muldrow: Preparing HR For Title VII Claims Beyond The Firing Table

Rumberger | Kirk on

“The Hamilton decision highlights the need for employers to stay up to date on legal developments. In this one decision, the Fifth Circuit opened the door for claims that just one day earlier were not actionable. Reviewing...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court to Hear Reverse Discrimination Appeal

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

A few months ago, we published an alert noting that the U.S. Supreme Court had agreed to hear Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The case addresses whether plaintiffs alleging reverse discrimination under Title VII...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Top Five: The Biggest Labor & Employment Developments from 2024

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

As we close out 2024 and look to 2025, I polled members of Spilman, myself included, to get their take on some of the biggest labor and employment developments from 2024 that have or will impact employers. You can find more...more

Perkins Coie

June Tip of the Month: Updated EEOC Guidance Enhances Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Protections

Perkins Coie on

On April 29, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its new Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the Guidance), the first update to its Guidance in over 20 years. Among the many...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Navigating the Rock & the Hard Place: Conflicting Federal and State Mandates for LGBTQ Employees

Foley & Lardner LLP on

“The rock and the hard place.” How often do employers find themselves here? If employers have LGBTQ employees in certain states, they are now bumping up against the “rock” of federal laws, like Title VII and Title IX, and the...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Get with the Pronoun: Eleventh Circuit Rules Pervasive Misgendering Is Harassment

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

The EEOC Unveils Final Version of Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC on

On April 29, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), after nearly seven years of effort, released updated guidance concerning harassment in the workplace. The updated guidance reflects three key developments...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Supreme Court Holds That Employees Need Not Show “Significant” Harm to Support a Title VII Discrimination Claim Based on a Job...

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a lateral job transfer can – in certain circumstances – be an illegal adverse action and support a claim for a lawsuit for unlawful discrimination. This...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Supreme Court Identifies Employee-Favorable Standard for Workplace Discrimination Claims

Quarles & Brady LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis that an employee alleging a discriminatory job transfer need only show “some injury” respecting their employment terms or conditions, rather than a...more

Rumberger | Kirk

Supreme Court Says Forced Job Transfers Must Cause Harm, But it Doesn’t Have to be Significant

Rumberger | Kirk on

In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court considered what protections Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides to employees who claim they were the victims of a discriminatory transfer....more

42 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide