On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a 9-0 ruling in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, paving the way for a “reverse discrimination” case to move forward. The ruling eliminates the “background circumstances” rule utilized by some federal courts Title VII reverse discrimination cases and is notable in light of the Trump Administration’s April 23, 2025, Executive Order to “Restore Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.”
Some Background on Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services
Ames was filed in 2019 by a straight woman who claims that she was passed over for a role at her long-term job and was later demoted. The woman filed a lawsuit alleging that she had been discriminated against based on her sexual orientation.
The district court’s dismissal of the case was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, which held that the claim could not move forward without detailing “background circumstances” to support allegations of reverse discrimination. The background circumstances rule has traditionally required majority-group plaintiffs, in addition to establishing a prima facie case of discrimination, to show that their employer had engaged in practices of discrimination against majority-group individuals.
However, the “background circumstances” rule has long been controversial due to its inconsistency with the statutory text of Title VII and the fact that it results in an unequal evidentiary standard. This was explicated in a 9-0 ruling by the Supreme Court that held that reverse discrimination cases should be subject to the same evidentiary standard as discrimination cases. The claim was thus revived and sent back to the lower courts for review.
What The Supreme Court Ruling Means for Discrimination Claims
The unanimous Supreme Court decision underscores that the legal underpinnings of “DEI” have been subject to challenge in the federal court system long before the Trump Administration’s April 2025 executive order and will continue to be subject to scrutiny under subsequent administrations, whether Democratic or Republican.
Employers should be mindful of where the ruling fits within the current DEI practice landscape and should be aware that the ruling may pave the way for more majority-group cases of “reverse discrimination” as well as increased liability risks among workplaces that consider protected characteristics when making employment decisions, in violation of federal equal employment laws.
HR departments should consider that:
- Title VII’s protections apply equally to all employees, whether they belong to a minority or majority group
- Employment decisions should be made according to qualifications and merit, not according to individual characteristics
- Regular review of policies and practices can help avoid creating a discriminatory environment or the imposition of differing standards
- Thorough documentation can help support fair, consistent application of policies
- Training and education regarding Title VII and discriminatory workplace practices, together with a culture of inclusion, can help avoid litigation
If you are an employer, a hiring or HR manager, or an employee with questions about hiring policies or procedures, contact the team at Warner PLLC. With extensive experience in labor and employment law, we can assist with the development and implementation of personnel policies and advise on hiring, disciplinary, or termination decisions, even within a shifting legal landscape. For more information, contact our team today.
