Majority-Group Plaintiffs Held to Same Standard in Title VII Cases

A heterosexual woman was hired as an executive secretary by Ohio Department of Youth Services in 2004, later promoted to program administrator. In 2019, she applied for a management role, was interviewed, but ultimately a lesbian woman was chosen. Days after her interview, she was demoted to secretary, and the agency hired a gay man for the vacant program administrator role.

She sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, claiming discrimination based on her sexual orientation. The District Court granted summary judgment to the agency, and the Sixth Circuit affirmed. Both courts held that Ms. Ames had not met her prima facie burden, which requires a plaintiff to show that the defendant acted with a discriminatory motive. 

The Sixth Circuit held that she was required to present background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is an unusual employer who discriminates against the majority. She needed to make this showing in addition to the usual requirements for establishing a prima facie case. Since she did not meet this burden by demonstrating that the decision was made by a member of the relevant minority group, or with statistical evidence indicating that members of the majority group had faced discrimination, summary judgment in the agency’s favor was appropriate. 

The Supreme Court heard the case to resolve a split over whether majority-group plaintiffs must meet a higher evidentiary burden to establish their prima facie case.

It reversed the Sixth Circuit in a unanimous opinion.

It states that Title VII’s disparate-treatment provision makes no distinctions between majority-group and minority-group plaintiffs. The text of Title VII makes it illegal to fail or refuse to hire, discharge, or discriminate against any individual. By offering equal protections to everyone—regardless of whether they are in a minority or majority group—Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements only on majority-group plaintiffs.