Supreme Court Reaffirms Equal Access to Title VII Protections

In a unanimous decision issued June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services vacated a Sixth Circuit ruling that imposed a higher evidentiary burden on majority-group plaintiffs in Title VII cases. The court held that all plaintiffs—regardless of race, sex, or sexual orientation—are entitled to equal protection whether they are in a majority or minority group.

The Background

Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, sued after being denied a promotion and then demoted by the Ohio Department of Youth Services. The department instead hired a lesbian woman and a gay man for the these two roles.

The trial court dismissed her claim at summary judgment, reasoning that Ames failed to show “background circumstances” supporting a suspicion that her employer discriminated against members of a majority group. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed.

Supreme Court Clarifies Title VII Standard: No Special Hurdles for Majority-Group Plaintiffs

Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Jackson flatly rejected the so-called “background circumstances” rule applied by the Sixth Circuit and several other federal appellate courts. The court emphasized that Title VII’s protections apply equally to all individuals, regardless of majority or minority status:

“Title VII’s disparate-treatment provision draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs... Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone.”

Key Takeaways for Employers

• Uniform standard: Title VII plaintiffs must meet the same evidentiary threshold regardless of their demographic characteristics. Employers should not assume that claims by majority-group employees can be dismissed because they lack “background circumstances” evidence of discrimination.
• Potential litigation impact: The court’s rejection of the background-circumstances rule removes a procedural barrier for majority-group plaintiffs, potentially increasing the number of viable Title VII claims.
• Review of DEI policies: Employers should re-evaluate their DEI-related employment decisions to ensure they do not give rise to reverse-discrimination claims.

Our Labor & Employment team is monitoring the implications of Ames for employers nationwide. If you have questions or would like an assessment of your risk and compliance strategies under Title VII, contact the author of this alert or a member of the Labor & Employment team.