In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of a plaintiff who alleged “reverse discrimination” in an employment decision.  

Marlean Ames was hired in 2004 as an employee at a youth services agency and was later promoted to an administrator position. She applied for a promotion to become a Bureau Chief in 2019. She did not receive that job and was instead demoted. Her employer promoted a gay man to fill her former administrator position and later selected a gay woman for the Bureau Chief job.  Ames sued her employer alleging that it discriminated against her on the basis of her sexual orientation as a heterosexual female in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.  

The federal district court and 6^th Circuit Court of Appeals added a new element to the traditional test applicable to prove disparate treatment in employment discrimination cases, requiring members of majority groups to prove “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority” in addition to the other elements. The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 in favor of Ames and invalidated the new requirement, finding that forcing members of a majority group to meet a higher standard was in itself discriminatory. Instead, discriminatory preference in favor of any group, majority or minority, is unlawful.