Supreme Court Lowers Burden for “Reverse Discrimination” Cases

Prior to June 5, 2025, an employee suing for discrimination in this Circuit was required present a prima facie case showing  that: 1) they belong to a protected class; 2) they were qualified for the job; 3) they experienced an adverse employment action; and 4) the employer treated similarly situated employees outside their protected class more favorably. But members of a “majority-group” (think: White, male, heteronormative, and/or Christian) suing in the Sixth Circuit was required to show an additional element, namely that there were “background circumstances” that his was the “unusual” employer that discriminated against the majority. 

Now, however, the Supreme Court of the United States has reversed this longstanding requirement. Writing for a unanimous court in in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, No. 23-1039, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson found that this rule “cannot be squared with the text of Title VII or prior precedent.” The Court reasoned that because Title VII bars discrimination against any individual on the basis of protected characteristics and does not distinguish between minority or majority groups, there is no room under the statute for a special pleading or proof standard to be imposed on majority-group plaintiffs. 

Without the heightened “background circumstances” requirement, majority-group employees who believe that they were discriminated against on the basis of their race, gender, national origin, or religion only have to prove the same prima facie case as minority employees.

Whether juries will need to be “sold” on the idea that “reverse discrimination” is possible remains to be seen. But for now, the path for majority-group employees to reach a jury trial has been made easier.

Matthew Okiishi
Attorney | ‭513-943-6659 | [email protected] |  + posts