Straight woman’s ‘reverse discrimination’ case could upend decades of equality safeguards

Ohio woman who lost out on promotion to a gay woman is asking the Supreme Court to allow her to file a workplace discrimination lawsuit against her employer. A woman’s claim that her workplace discriminated against her because she is straight could be the case that opens the door making it easier for people in “majority” groups, such as white people, heterosexual people and men, to file discriminatory lawsuits.

Supreme Court justices appeared to agree with some of Marlean Ames’s argument in her pursuit to file a discrimination lawsuit against her employer, the Ohio Department of Youth Services, during oral arguments on Wednesday. Ames says her boss, a gay woman, passed her over for a promotion and instead gave it to another gay woman who was less qualified. Ames says she was then demoted and a gay man who was also less qualified was given her position.

“She was a 20-year employee, great reviews, and then all of a sudden she's not hired and someone's hired who’s gay, doesn't have her level of college experience and didn't even want the job,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said reciting facts in the case.

“Something suspicious about that. It certainly can give rise to an inference of discrimination,” Sotomayor added. Courts have previously relied on “background circumstances” when reviewing discrimination cases as they apply to majority groups. These standards require a person in a majority group to show that their employer is the “unusual one” that discriminates against members of majority groups.

These standards were set in 1981 and are used in more than half of the country’s federal appeals courts. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals used the standards when reviewing, and ultimately deciding against Ames, in her case. However, the justices appeared mostly to agree that it was unfair to apply higher standards to those in majority groups when it comes to discrimination cases.

“It doesn't matter if she was gay or whether she was straight, she would have the exact same burden and be treated the exact same way under Title VII,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett said. Justice Neil Gorsuch said there was “radical agreement” in the courtroom for that position.

If the court rules with Ames, it could make it easier for white people to bring claims of racial discrimination as a result of diversity, equity and inclusion policies – something President Donald Trump is determined to dismantle in the administration.

Within the first few days of taking office, Trump signed executive orders forcing all federal agencies and departments to get rid of DEI policies, hires and departments. Justices will make a decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services by the summer.