Supreme Court Steps In: ‘Reverse’ Discrimination Case Erupts After White, Straight Woman Axed

The Supreme Court will hear a fascinating blockbuster of a case about “reverse” discrimination on Wednesday.

As covered by multiple outlets, an Ohio woman will be making her case to the Supreme Court after she claims she was wrongfully terminated for being a heterosexual woman.

Unsurprisingly, outlets were swift to offer details on the peculiar case — as well as their own two cents.

Woman was passed over for promotion because she was not gay, Supreme Court case claims https://t.co/9aoUtzbxB3

— Daily Mail Online (@MailOnline) February 25, 2025

According to Reuters, the plaintiff, Marlean Ames, looks to revive her lawsuit against her previous employers, Ohio’s Department of Youth Services.

For Ames, this is a second-chance to fight this fight, as her previous case against the DYS was thrown out by lower courts.

Reuters added: “Ames, 60, has argued that she was discriminated against because she is heterosexual in violation of a landmark federal anti-discrimination law. Ames said she had a gay supervisor in 2019 when she was passed over for a promotion in favor of a gay woman and demoted in favor of a gay man — both of whom, she asserted, were less qualified than her.”

While Reuters was largely neutral in its coverage, other outlets lamented the potential of this SCOTUS hearing.

NBC News subtly described Ames’ case as “novel.”

Meanwhile, The Washington Post complained that Ames’ case could “upend discrimination law.”

And while that all may be true if something comes to pass, for now, the Supreme Court is merely listening to the argument of a woman who genuinely believes she was discriminated against based on her sexuality.

Reuters explained: “At issue is the requirement by some U.S. courts that plaintiffs from majority groups provide more evidence than minority plaintiffs to show they faced discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

“This law prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, national origin and sex — including sexual orientation.”

Yes, most readers have probably heard of these anti-discrimination laws at one point or another, especially in regards to the LGBT crowd, but SCOTUS is now exploring whether or not these laws also apply to people who are not a member of the LGBT community.

Per NBC, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio, ruled that these laws do not apply to non-minorities, when that court threw Ames’ case out in 2023.

The lower court ruled that Ames did not show the required “background circumstances” showing that the DYS was an “unusual employer who discriminates against the majority,” according to Ames’ lawyers.

Ames began working with the Department of Youth Services in 2004, before getting promoted to administrator in 2014, Reuters reported.

She also applied for a promotion in 2019 but was passed over for a gay woman who did not apply for the same position.

Ames also claims that, around the same time of the above incident, she was given a pay decrease from $100,000 to about $60,000, before eventually being replaced by a gay man.

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.