Left in a Twist? Supreme Court Rules Everyone Has Civil Rights
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled that majority-group plaintiffs—like straight or white individuals—are equally protected under Title VII discrimination laws.
In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that individuals from majority groups, such as heterosexual or white individuals, are entitled to the same protections under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as those from minority groups. The case, Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, centered on Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman who alleged that she was denied a promotion and subsequently demoted in favor of less qualified LGBTQ colleagues.
Previously, certain federal courts required plaintiffs from majority groups to provide additional evidence—known as "background circumstances"—to support claims of discrimination. This standard effectively imposed a higher burden of proof on majority-group plaintiffs compared to their minority counterparts.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing for the Court, stated that Title VII "draws no distinction between members of majority and minority groups," emphasizing that the law prohibits discrimination against "any individual" based on protected characteristics. The Court's decision eliminates the "background circumstances" requirement, ensuring that all individuals, regardless of group membership, have equal access to legal recourse under Title VII.
This ruling has significant implications for employment discrimination law, particularly in jurisdictions that previously upheld the heightened evidentiary standard. It reinforces the principle that anti-discrimination protections apply uniformly, without regard to the plaintiff's demographic group.
The case has been remanded to the lower courts for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion.
Tired of corporate media ignoring the real stories?
The Coffman Chronicle breaks it down with truth, teeth, and no billionaire filter.
Subscribe now to get bold reporting in your inbox—because democracy doesn’t defend itself.
Become a free or paid subscriber today.
The law is the law, weather they agreed with it or not. It's not ideological, it's the law.
9-0?
The liberal justices joined in?
"I would like to hear their reasoning."
Translated:
"This better be good."