Legal expert says decision ‘levels the playing field’
A recent Supreme Court ruling “levels the playing field” for white, heterosexual, or male applicants for university jobs, according to legal experts.
The Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling this month in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, affirms Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires equal treatment for all groups.
Previously, some federal circuit courts had created an extra standard where majority groups, such as white litigants, had to pass a higher bar to bring claims. White male applicants have regularly sued universities for racial discrimination, including at the University of Illinois, Pennsylvania State University, and University of South Florida.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals erroneously required Marlean Ames to show “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority,” the Supreme Court ruled.
Ames alleged the Department of Youth Services passed her over for a promotion twice by her gay superior in favor of gay individuals because she was straight. Justice Ketanji Jackson wrote the opinion.
“Our case law thus makes clear that the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group,” Justice Jackson wrote.
This ruling restores the clear intent of civil rights laws, according to a legal expert.
Congress made clear “discrimination is unconstitutional,” Cece O’Leary, the vice president of legal initiatives, told The College Fix via email.
“It does not and should not matter if someone is part of a majority group, such as white, male, or heterosexual—if someone is treated differently, he or she has a right to stand up to that discrimination in court,” O’Leary, an attorney with the Southeastern Legal Foundation, said.
O’Leary explained the importance of the ruling in light of the current state of higher education.
“Colleges should be looking at merit alone in their admissions and hiring practices, not skin color, sex, or sexual orientation,” O’Leary told The Fix.
“Although this ruling applies to Title VII employment practices, it sets strong case precedent to hold schools accountable and ensure that they are complying with all civil rights laws as written and as intended,” O’Leary said.
A legal expert who represents clients suing universities said the court’s decision “levels the playing field.”
Samantha Harris, a longtime advocate for free speech and experienced attorney, says the court’s decision “levels the playing field” when it comes to discrimination cases.
“For those in jurisdictions where courts had imposed a heightened standard on majority-group plaintiffs, this decision levels the playing field,” Samantha Harris told The Fix via email. She is the principal at Allen Harris Law, an education legal firm. She also worked for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (now the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression).
Harris says the decision could prompt backlash from university leaders.
“Some university leaders definitely see themselves as the last bulwarks against the dismantling of DEI, and may be inclined…to double down if they see the Court’s decision as part of the broader DEI rollback efforts,” Harris said.
However, she believes the decision’s collective support sends a clear message.
“The unanimity of the decision definitely makes it harder to argue, or even believe, that this is a politically motivated opinion rather than one that is clearly grounded in clear statutory language and judicial precedent,” Harris told The Fix.
NAACP attorney says SCOTUS ‘did not make it easier for white employees’ to sue
However, an attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund had a different interpretation of the rulings.
Alexsis Johnson says the court’s decision will not make it any easier for majority groups in discrimination cases. She called this interpretation a “misunderstanding.”
“Many members of the media and the general public seem to be misunderstanding exactly what the Supreme Court decided in this case,” Johnson told The Fix via email.
“The Court did not make it easier for white employees or any other majority group to sue their employer for discrimination,” Johnson said.
Johnson says the court’s decision simply clarifies the use of Title VII in discrimination cases.
“What the Court did do was correct a misunderstanding several lower courts had regarding how to apply the relevant legal test in employment discrimination cases,” Johnson said.
A former counseling student who has criticized indoctrination in her program said via email the ruling “should help significantly by giving people permission to acknowledge what’s happening to them and have hope that they will be taken seriously if they have the wherewithal to speak up.”
“This new ruling is encouraging, but it’s also just the beginning of the conversation, Suzannah Alexander, with FAIR for All, told The Fix.
MORE: Nearly 90 universities have rebranded their DEI offices, College Fix finds
IMAGE CAPTION AND CREDIT: The current Supreme Court; Fred Schilling/Collection of the Supreme Court of the U.S.
Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter
