A June 2025 U.S. Supreme ruling just reminded everyone that workplace discrimination laws apply to everyone, not just minorities. And courts cannot make it harder for majority-group employees to have their discrimination claims based on race, sex, or sexual orientation heard by a jury.

In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a heterosexual employee does not need to meet a higher burden to bring her discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Bias is bias, regardless of whether the employee belongs to a majority group or a minority group. The legal standard doesn’t change based on who the employee is.

Watch: Can majority-group employees sue for discrimination?

For employers, this ruling affects internal investigations, employment policies, hiring, promotions, and demotions. HR must address complaints, apply internal policies, and make decisions consistently and based on merit for all employees, not just those in historically marginalized groups.

What was this case about?

Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, claimed she was denied a promotion and then demoted, while a lesbian colleague was promoted, and a gay man replaced Ms. Ames. She filed a Title VII lawsuit.

Ms. Ames was not permitted to take her case to trial. The lower court required her to meet an extra burden because she’s part of a majority group, heterosexual women. She had to prove that her employer was one of the rare companies that discriminates against majority-group employees. She could not do so, and her case was dismissed. Ms. Ames appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which agreed with the lower court’s ruling.

Ms. Ames then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court struck down the additional legal burden for majority-group employees, holding unanimously that it is not supported by the law, and instructed the lower court to reassess Ms. Ames’ claims using the proper standard.

The court’s message:  The law protects individuals, not groups

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing for the full Court, made it clear:  Title VII protects every employee, regardless of whether they are a member of a minority or a majority group. The law doesn’t provide more protection to some groups than to others.

Here’s what the Court emphasized:

• No double standard.  Straight, white, or male employees can pursue viable discrimination claims just like anyone else. They don’t have to prove the company has a “history” of discriminating against people like them.
• Don’t overcomplicate it.  The first step in a Title VII discrimination case is relatively simple:  The employee must show that they were treated less favorably because of their race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or national origin. In the Ames case, the plaintiff had to show:  1) she was heterosexual, 2) she applied for a promotion, 3) she was denied the promotion, and 4) a non-heterosexual employee received the promotion instead. That’s it. When this case goes back to the trial court, assuming Ms. Ames meets this correct standard, the employer will have the opportunity to provide a legitimate business reason for the promotion denial. Ms. Ames then will have to show inconsistencies in that reasoning to proceed to trial.
• The same standard applies to everyone.  Whether someone is gay or straight, Black or white, male or female, they get the same shot at being heard in court.

What about DEI?

The Ames ruling doesn’t mean employers can’t have diversity goals. But it does mean that policies and practices need to be fair, consistent, and documented. DEI could lead to claims of discrimination if the policies disadvantage such majority-group employees as white, heterosexual males. With respect to minority affinity groups, including majority-group allies will go a long way toward promoting diversity and preventing claims that they were excluded and thus denied opportunities given to minorities.

What employers should do now

• Review your internal complaint process.  Make sure complaints are handled consistently and equally, no matter who they come from.
• Train your team.  Supervisors and HR should never assume someone’s complaint is “less valid” because they’re not in a minority group. Avoid assumptions based on demographics.
• Policies for all.  Ensure your policies protect all employees.
• Audit your decision-making.  Hiring, promotions, demotions, employment terminations, and any other employment decisions should be consistently documented, non-biased, and based on merit.
• Revisit DEI programs.  They should support inclusion without promoting favoritism for one group over another.

Worried your policies or your process could lead to discrimination claims, particularly from members of majority groups? We can help.

Call us at 973.787.8442  

Email: legaladmin@alixrubinlaw.com

This blog is for informational purposes only. It is not offered as legal advice, nor is it intended to create an attorney-client relationship with any reader. Consult with competent local employment counsel to determine how the matters addressed here may affect you.

Need to cut back in 2025? Don’t miss key layoff rules for NJ and NY employers