SCOTUS to hear reverse discrimination case on high burden for majority groups

THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WILL HEAR A CASE NEXT WEEK –

THAT COULD REDEFINE HOW SO-CALLED “REVERSE DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS” ARE HANDLED UNDER FEDERAL LAW. 

“REVERSE DISCRIMINATION” REFERS TO “BIAS AGAINST MAJORITY GROUPS” – SUCH AS WHITE PEOPLE AND HETEROSEXUALS.

MARLEAN AMES, A 60-YEAR-OLD STRAIGHT WOMAN, ALLEGES SHE WAS DENIED A PROMOTION – AND DEMOTED – DUE TO HER SEXUAL ORIENTATION WHILE WORKING AT THE OHIO DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES.

AMES SUED HER EMPLOYER – BUT THE INITIAL CASE WAS TOSSED OUT BY AN APPEALS COURT.

THE PANEL OF JUDGES ACKNOWLEDGED SHE HAD STANDING – BUT SAID SHE FAILED TO SHOW “BACKGROUND CIRCUMSTANCES”— OR ADDITIONAL PROOF SUGGESTING HER EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATES AGAINST MAJORITY GROUPS— IN ORDER TO ADVANCE HER CLAIM. 

THE JUDGES SAID AMES COULDN’T PROVIDE THAT – AND TOSSED THE CASE.

NOW THE SUPREME COURT WILL HEAR ARGUMENTS –

AND DECIDE WHETHER THE APPELLATE COURT WAS WRONG TO REQUIRE “BACKGROUND CIRCUMSTANCES” FROM AMES –

SOMETHING NOT NEEDED IN DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS COMING FROM MINORITY GROUPS.

AMES – CONTENDS THIS IMPOSES A HIGHER BURDEN ON MAJORITY GROUP MEMBERS – VIOLATING TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.

SOME BACKGROUND SPECIFICS IN AMES’ ORIGINAL DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT –

AMES BEGAN WORKING AT THE OHIO DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES IN 2004 AND WAS PROMOTED TO PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR IN 2014. 

IN 2019, AFTER BEING PASSED OVER FOR A BUREAU CHIEF ROLE, SHE WAS DEMOTED, LEADING TO A SIGNIFICANT PAY CUT FROM 47 DOLLARS AN HOUR TO 28 DOLLARS AN HOUR.

ACCORDING TO AMES’ SUIT –

THE DEPARTMENT HAD FILLED THE BUREAU CHIEF POSITION AMES WANTED – WITH A GAY WOMAN – 

AND AMES’S PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR ROLE SHE WAS DEMOTED FROM –

WAS FILLED BY A GAY MAN.

AMES ARGUED BOTH CANDIDATES WERE LESS QUALIFIED THAN SHE FOR THE POSITIONS.

SINCE PRESIDENT TRUMP’S REELECTION, HE AND FELLOW REPUBLICANS HAVE LAUNCHED INITIATIVES TO END DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION HIRING PRACTICES IN WORKPLACES AND SCHOOLS, LABELING THEM DISCRIMINATORY ACTIONS UNDER THE VEIL OF INCLUSION. 

ALTHOUGH AMES’S CASE MIGHT APPEAR TO ALIGN WITH CONSERVATIVE EFFORTS, IT IS NOTABLE THAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION FILED A BRIEF **SUPPORTING AMES.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARGUED TITLE VII APPLIES EQUALLY TO ALL EMPLOYEES, WITHOUT ADDITIONAL HURDLES FOR MAJORITY GROUP MEMBERS. 

WHILE THE OHIO DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES ARGUES THAT AMES FAILED TO SHOW HER SEXUAL ORIENTATION INFLUENCED EMPLOYMENT DECISIONS –

GIVEN THE BOSS MAKING THOSE PROMOTION AND DEMOTION CALLS WAS STRAIGHT.

THE SUPREME COURT WILL HEAR THE CASE WEDNESDAY.

THE COURT’S RULING COULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR MAJORITY GROUP MEMBERS TO BRING REVERSE DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS UNDER TITLE VII, POTENTIALLY EXPANDING THE SCOPE OF WORKPLACE BIAS LAWSUITS

THANKS FOR WATCHING OUR NEWS UPDATE.

FOR STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS I’M KARAH RUCKER.

IF YOU LIKED THIS STORY – CHECK OUT OUR MOBILE APP WHERE YOU CAN PERSONALIZE NOTIFICATIONS TO RECEIVE ALERTS FROM SPECIFIC REPORTERS –

OR ON SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT MATTER MOST TO YOU.

OR YOU CAN ALWAYS FIND US ONLINE – AT SAN DOT COM.