by Robert VerBruggen at City Journal
In a unanimous decision, the justices rule that employment-discrimination protections apply equally to all, including members of “majority groups.”
The 1964 Civil Rights Act made it illegal to base employment decisions on protected characteristics, including sex and race. It doesn’t contain a carveout for “reverse” discrimination against majority groups—nor does it create special, extra-demanding legal standards for such cases.
And yet courts in several of the nation’s appeals circuits have long made these cases harder to bring. In the Sixth Circuit, for instance, plaintiffs from majority groups have had to show “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”
Under the Supreme Court’s decision last week in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, this double standard is no more. The ruling was unanimous, with the majority opinion written by liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
This case may not prove as consequential as the Court’s ruling ending affirmative action in higher education or the Trump administration’s war on DEI. But it’s another step toward neutral and fair antidiscrimination laws.
Jackson’s opinion in Ames presents an accurate and straightforward interpretation of the law. As the justice writes, the statute’s key provision “draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs.” Previous Supreme Court cases have only reinforced that clear text.
The broader context here is worth noting as well. Interestingly, Ames…
Continue Reading