The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in a case brought by an Ohio woman who claims she was discriminated against at work because she is straight. Marlean Ames filed the suit against the Ohio Department of Youth Services under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. Ames alleges that a lesbian woman received a promotion she was also seeking and that she was later demoted, with her former position given to a gay man.
Lower courts ruled in favor of the state agency, leading Ames to appeal to the Supreme Court. Justices appeared to lean in her favor, questioning a precedent that sets a higher bar for plaintiffs in “majority groups” to prove workplace discrimination. The Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit Court had ruled that Ames needed to demonstrate “background circumstances” proving that the state agency was an “unusual employer” that discriminates against the majority.
During oral arguments, justices on both sides of the aisle expressed skepticism about the current standard. Justice Amy Coney Barrett stated that Ames should have the same burden of proof under Title VII, regardless of her sexual orientation. Justice Neil Gorsuch advocated for a narrow ruling in Ames’ favor, while Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted there were “suspicious” elements in the way Ames was treated.
Ohio Solicitor General T. Elliot Gaiser conceded that “everyone should be treated equally” under employment law but defended the lower court’s ruling. Conservative legal group America First Legal filed a brief supporting Ames, arguing that the “background circumstances” requirement is unconstitutional and arbitrarily limits employees’ rights. Attorneys from the former Biden administration also filed a brief calling for the rule’s removal.
The state contends that Ames’ demotion was not due to discrimination but rather a restructuring of leadership aimed at improving responses to sexual violence in juvenile corrections. Ohio officials also argued that Ames was seen as difficult to work with, citing this as a factor in the decision-making process.
A Supreme Court ruling in Ames’ favor could set a significant precedent in employment discrimination cases, reinforcing that all employees, regardless of their majority or minority status, should be treated equally under federal law.
