News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Reverse Discrimination › Affirmative Action

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Ballard Spahr LLP

Reverse Discrimination Lawsuits Are So Back

Ballard Spahr LLP on

On June 5, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court eliminated the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard for majority plaintiffs (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) who claim discrimination under Title VII (also known as reverse...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

SCOTUS Rejects Heightened Standard for Title VII Majority Group

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC on

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264, (U.S. June 5, 2025), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that majority group plaintiffs (in this instance, a heterosexual plaintiff) do not need to meet...more

K&L Gates LLP

Supreme Court Invalidates "Background Circumstances" Rule in Title VII Cases

K&L Gates LLP on

On 5 June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that, in order to establish a Title VII claim, a plaintiff who is a member of a “majority group” is not required to show “background...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Majority-Group Plaintiffs Are Not Subject to a Heightened Evidentiary Standard Under Title VII

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Jackson in Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Services, ruling that the “background circumstances” test—which applies a heighted...more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

“Reverse Discrimination” Cases Subject to Same Evidentiary Standard Says Supreme Court

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints on

Can members of a majority group be subject to a heightened pleading standard for their Title VII discrimination claims? The United States Supreme Court answered this question with a unanimous “no” in Ames v. Ohio Department...more

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

Supreme Court Eliminates Heightened Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are not...more

Berkshire

Supreme Court Rejects Higher Standards for Majority Plaintiffs in Title VII Disparate Treatment Cases

Berkshire on

The Supreme Court has voted unanimously to end a Circuit Court split regarding whether members of a “majority group” have additional evidentiary burdens when bringing a case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Standard for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Disparate Treatment Claims

Foley Hoag LLP on

Key Takeaways: - The Supreme Court held that Title VII does not permit courts to impose a heightened evidentiary standard on majority-group plaintiffs alleging disparate treatment. - Some lower courts have required...more

Poyner Spruill LLP

Supreme Court Rejects Requirement that Majority-Plaintiffs Must Satisfy Heightened Evidentiary Standard to Prevail Under Title VII

Poyner Spruill LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated ruling in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, concluding that courts cannot require members of a majority group to satisfy a heightened evidentiary...more

McDermott Will & Emery

SCOTUS Clarifies Standard for Evaluating “Reverse” Discrimination

McDermott Will & Emery on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States resolved the split among federal circuits and held that the same standard used to evaluate claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to all...more

Williams Mullen

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Standards for So-Called “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Williams Mullen on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs bringing discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) cannot be required to satisfy a heightened evidentiary...more

Mayer Brown

US Supreme Court Clarifies Standard in Reverse-Discrimination Cases

Mayer Brown on

DECISION ALERT: AMES V. OHIO DEP’T OF YOUTH SVCS. INTRODUCTION: On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that so-called “reverse discrimination” claims—discrimination claims...more

WilmerHale

Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services: SCOTUS Simplifies Reverse Discrimination Claims

WilmerHale on

As widely expected, the Supreme Court’s June 5, 2025 decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services confirmed that a plaintiff alleging employment discrimination under Title VII cannot be held to a different,...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Reconciles Circuit Split Regarding Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Claims

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the “background circumstances” requirement multiple circuit courts of appeals have applied to Title...more

McAfee & Taft

Reverse discrimination claims boosted by Supreme Court

McAfee & Taft on

Just today, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a contentious disagreement between courts regarding the burden of proof required to bring a disparate treatment claim under Title VII.  While the majority of appeals courts in the...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

2024 State AGs Year in Review - UPDATED 4/1/25

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

In 2024, state attorneys general (“State AGs”) focused on a broad variety of areas and industries including, in particular, emerging industries such as artificial intelligence (AI) and privacy and social media protections....more

Whiteford

Employment Law Update: Supreme Court Hears Argument on Reverse Discrimination Claim with Implications for DEI

Whiteford on

Just as employers are reconsidering their approach to DEI and the myriad of potential risks such policies could present under current administration enforcement priorities, the Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case...more

Cozen O'Connor

Costco Urged by Republican AGs to Repeal DEI Policies

Cozen O'Connor on

A group of 19 Republican AGs announced that they have sent a letter to Costco Wholesale Corporation, warning that its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies may violate state and federal civil rights laws prohibiting...more

McGlinchey Stafford

Will DEI Programs Become Extinct Under the Trump Administration?

McGlinchey Stafford on

In an effort to embrace diversity and inclusion, many employers established Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs. The look of these programs varied from company to company; however, many of the programs...more

Cozen O'Connor

Democratic AGs Pen Letter Opposing Walmart’s Decision to End Diversity Initiatives

Cozen O'Connor on

A group of 13 Democratic AGs wrote a letter to Walmart’s President and CEO expressing concern about Walmart’s announcement that it will end certain aspects of its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives....more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

SCOTUS Takes Up Reverse Discrimination Framework Under Title VII

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted cert in a hotly contested case addressing the standards of proof applicable to reverse discrimination claims under Title VII. The case comes on the heels of the court’s decision last...more

Nilan Johnson Lewis PA

Reverse Discrimination and Pay Equity

Nilan Johnson Lewis PA on

Employers have seen a significant increase in reverse race and gender discrimination claims over the last four years. White and male employees are arguing that employer efforts to address historic race and gender inequities...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

The rise of “reverse” discrimination claims

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

Since the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admission, we have observed an increase in “reverse” discrimination claims where members of a majority group, such as whites or males, allege discrimination...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Federal court dismisses one of first post-SFFA lawsuits alleging “reverse” discrimination

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

Spoiler alert: DEI policy wasn't enough to establish discrimination. Five journalists who were formerly employed with Gannett Co., Inc., alleged that the media company’s diversity policies resulted in “reverse”...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Ten ways to avoid challenges to DEI initiatives

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

How prepared is your organization? Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies have faced increased...more

33 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide