The U.S. Supreme Court is currently deliberating whether to allow a discrimination lawsuit filed by Marlean Ames, a long-time employee of the Ohio Department of Youth Services, to proceed. Ames, who identifies as heterosexual, claims she was passed over for a promotion in favor of a lesbian colleague, despite having positive performance evaluations. The incident occurred in 2019 when Ames and two other heterosexual employees were overlooked for the same promotion.
Ames has been with the Ohio Department of Youth Services for over two decades. She argues that her sexual orientation played a role in her being denied the advancement opportunity. However, a lower court previously ruled that the department's managers had "legitimate, nondiscriminatory business reasons" for their decision, and concluded that Ames failed to demonstrate a pattern of discrimination or provide "background circumstances" to support her claim.
In 2020, the Supreme Court broadened the interpretation of a 1964 U.S. law to extend workplace discrimination protections to include sexual orientation. Under current U.S. court precedent, individuals from majority groups, such as white people or heterosexuals, must meet a higher evidentiary standard to substantiate claims of discrimination. Despite Ohio state officials denying any wrongdoing, Ames has yet to succeed in the lower courts.
During oral arguments at the Supreme Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch expressed that permitting Ames' lawsuit might be a "wise course," suggesting it could set a meaningful precedent. Justice Amy Coney Barrett emphasized that "it doesn't matter if she was gay or whether she was straight," underscoring that the legal burden should remain consistent regardless of sexual orientation.
"It doesn't matter if she was gay or whether she was straight." – Amy Coney Barrett
Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that "something's suspicious," which "certainly can give rise to an inference of discrimination," indicating potential merit in re-evaluating the case.
"Something's suspicious" which "certainly can give rise to an inference of discrimination." – Sonia Sotomayor
U.S. courts require a higher level of evidence from members of majority groups alleging discrimination. The Supreme Court's decision could potentially direct lower courts to revisit Ames' claims and allow her lawsuit to advance.