Supreme Court May Revive Case of Straight Woman Alleging LGBTQ Discrimination Under Title VII
In a striking moment of unity during oral arguments this week, the U.S. Supreme Court appeared to favor reviving a discrimination lawsuit filed by a straight, white woman who claims she was denied a promotion and later demoted because of her sexual orientation.
The case—Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services—could have wide-ranging consequences for how workplace discrimination laws apply to majority-group members, especially in the context of ongoing culture war tensions in the U.S.
Justice Neil Gorsuch described the rare courtroom consensus as “radical agreement,” as the justices signaled discomfort with a lower court ruling that had dismissed Ames’ lawsuit on procedural grounds.
🔹 Background on the Case
Ames, a 15-year veteran of Ohio’s Department of Youth Services, alleges that her openly gay boss bypassed her for a promotion in favor of less qualified gay candidates, and later demoted her. She sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on sex or sexual orientation.
But the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed her case, ruling that Ames had not shown the necessary “background circumstances” to support her claim—as she belongs to a majority group (straight individuals). The court held that majority-group plaintiffs face a higher burden when claiming reverse discrimination.
🔹 Key Legal Question: Can Straight People Claim LGBTQ Discrimination?
Ames and her legal team argue that this heightened standard violates equal protection principles. During arguments, the Ohio Solicitor General, Elliot Gaiser, agreed with much of the court’s reasoning, telling Justice Amy Coney Barrett, “We agree, Ohio agrees, that it’s wrong to treat people differently.”
The justices seemed to back Ames’ position that Title VII requires equal treatment for all, not different rules based on whether someone is part of a majority or minority group.
🔹 What’s Next?
If the Court sends the case back to the lower courts, Ames would have another chance to argue her case—but success is not guaranteed. The case could set a new precedent, making it easier for members of majority groups to bring discrimination claims under federal civil rights law.
Leave a Comment