U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Standard for Reverse Discrimination Claims

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that reverse discrimination claims do not require more evidence than standard discrimination claims. Instead, all discrimination claims are subject to the same evidentiary standard, regardless of whether the plaintiff is a member of a majority or minority group. 

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employers from intentionally discriminating against individuals on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin (i.e., protected traits). The traditional framework for analyzing Title VII discrimination claims generally requires an initial showing that the employer acted with a discriminatory motive based on the individual’s protected trait. However, circuit courts historically disagreed as to whether individuals alleging discrimination based on their membership in a majority group (e.g., status as white, heterosexual or male) must also show “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”

The Supreme Court unanimously held that the requirement for additional background circumstances is inconsistent with Title VII’s text and Supreme Court case law. The Supreme Court explained that Title VII prohibits discrimination based on an individual’s protected trait and does not distinguish between minority-group plaintiffs and majority-group plaintiffs. 

While the Supreme Court’s ruling does not impose new obligations on employers, it establishes a uniform standard for individuals alleging any claim of employment discrimination, including reverse discrimination.