WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in the landmark civil rights case titled Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. 

In December, America First Legal (AFL) filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiff, Marlean A. Ames, a social worker from Ohio who was denied a promotion and later demoted in favor of LGBT coworkers. Despite substantial evidence of discrimination, Ms. Ames was denied the opportunity to take her case to trial because she had not provided additional proof of “background circumstances.” 

“Background circumstances” is a special test that some courts apply to discrimination claims by someone in a “majority group.” This test creates a rebuttable presumption that individuals in the “majority” are not discriminated against and requires these individuals to prove additional facts to seek redress.

America First Legal’s brief argues that the Constitution and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 guarantee all American workers equality, and that the “background circumstances” rule applied to deny Ms. Ames her day in court is unlawful for two primary reasons.

First, the presumption underlying the rule, that it is the “odd employer that discriminates against the majority,” is untenable in light of widespread corporate “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) initiatives that underlie several of AFL’s cases, including three lawsuits against CBS, and lawsuits against IBM, Ally Financial, and Meta. 

Second, courts have never resolved precisely how the “majority” should be determined, whether by industry, location, employer, supervisor, or other factors. Any attempt to answer such a question or engage in such an analysis would be impractical, and necessarily require crude and untenable stereotyping of people based on their race and sex, in violation of law.

The better approach is to simply apply Title VII’s guarantee of equal treatment to all American workers.

Statement from Reed D. Rubinstein, America First Legal Senior Vice President:

“The Constitution and Title VII promise color-blind equality. Yet the judge-made “background circumstances” rule betrays this promise. The Supreme Court should bury the “background circumstances” rule once and for all, and allow Ms. Ames her day in court,” said Reed D. Rubinstein.

Read the full amicus brief here.

Photo credit: Adobe Stock Images: chokniti