On February 26, 2025, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. At oral argument, the Court appeared poised to hold that a plaintiff who alleges discrimination based on a protected trait that is not one of a historically underrepresented group (referred to by the Court as a “majority-group” plaintiff) has the same burden of proof as a plaintiff whose protected trait is one of a historically underrepresented group (referred to by the Court as a “minority-group” plaintiff).
The case concerns a straight, female plaintiff who alleges that she suffered sex and sexual orientation discrimination because she was passed over for promotion in favor of a gay individual. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer, holding that the plaintiff did not establish discrimination under the “background circumstances” doctrine, which requires a majority-group plaintiff to show “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.” The Sixth Circuit affirmed.
After oral argument, the Supreme Court appears likely to overturn the Sixth Circuit’s decision, and do away with the heightened burden of the “background circumstances” doctrine, possibly by unanimous decision. Such a reversal will emphasize the principal of equal protection under the law, regardless of whether an individual is in a “majority” or “minority” group.