One Set of Rules: Treat Every Discrimination Complaint the Same

Authored by WLJ Law Clerk Wynne James

This summer, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling that reinforces a core principle for employers: Title VII’s protections apply equally to all employees, regardless of whether they are members of a minority or majority group.

In Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, the plaintiff, a heterosexual woman, alleged that she was discriminated against on the basis of her sexuality when she was twice denied a promotion in favor of gay candidates.

The lower courts initially ruled that Ms. Ames could not state a claim for discrimination as a member of a majority group (sometimes referred to as “reverse discrimination”) without showing that there were “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.” This reflects some federal circuit courts’ use of a heightened evidentiary burden for proving reverse discrimination claims, since majority-group plaintiffs generally cannot rely on a history of discrimination to support the rebuttable presumption of discrimination afforded to most minority-group plaintiffs.

The Supreme Court unanimously struck down the heightened “background circumstances” standard, holding that Title VII does not distinguish between majority and minority-group plaintiffs – its only concern is whether an employer intentionally discriminates against the plaintiff of behalf of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

Key Takeaways: 

• Employers are required to seriously treat and promptly address all internal complaints of discrimination/harassment, regardless of the complainant’s identity.
• The identity of the complaining employee does not alter the employer’s legal obligation to investigate and respond promptly and appropriately.
• Selective enforcement or failure to act based on the identity of the complaining employee increases exposure to liability. Inaction or differential treatment in response to a complaint, even from a majority-group employee, can create significant legal and reputational risk.

Best practices remain the same: clear policies, consistent enforcement, and timely investigations are essential to both preventing discrimination and minimizing liability.

Ref: Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, 606 U.S. ___, 145 S.Ct. 1540 (2025).