Supreme Court rules in favor of a straight woman in "reverse discrimination" claim

[W_and_C]

Didn’t see any threads on this. IMO, this is obviously good. Discrimination is discrimination whether applied against minority or majority.

9-0 ruling with Ketanji Brown Jackson writing the opinion.

Supreme Court revives straight woman's discrimination claim

The unanimous ruling could make it easier in some parts of the country for people belonging to majority groups to bring such “reverse discrimination” claims. It overturns precedent in some lower courts that says someone from a majority group has to meet a higher bar than someone from a minority group for a case to move forward.

Marlean Ames sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace, after a lesbian woman obtained a promotion she had applied for. She was later demoted, and her old position was taken by a gay man.

[PurpnGold]

@W_and_C

Didn’t see any threads on this. IMO, this is obviously good. Discrimination is discrimination whether applied against minority or majority.

9-0 ruling with Ketanji Brown Jackson writing the opinion.

Supreme Court revives straight woman's discrimination claim

The unanimous ruling could make it easier in some parts of the country for people belonging to majority groups to bring such “reverse discrimination” claims. It overturns precedent in some lower courts that says someone from a majority group has to meet a higher bar than someone from a minority group for a case to move forward.

Marlean Ames sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace, after a lesbian woman obtained a promotion she had applied for. She was later demoted, and her old position was taken by a gay man.

This seemed unnecessary. Was there some precedent that said “majority” couldn’t be discriminated against by “minority”

Discrimination is discrimination. That wasn’t obvious?

[peek-a-boo]

Reverse discrimination is DEI run amok. Thank God for small favors.

[peek-a-boo]

@PurpnGold

This seemed unnecessary. Was there some precedent that said “majority” couldn’t be discriminated against by “minority”

Discrimination is discrimination. That wasn’t obvious?

And yet it happens every day in the name of diversity,

[FreeAndClear]

@peek-a-boo

@PurpnGold

This seemed unnecessary. Was there some precedent that said “majority” couldn’t be discriminated against by “minority”

Discrimination is discrimination. That wasn’t obvious?

And yet it happens every day in the name of diversity,

The golden middle is all but impossible. Human prejudices run deep

[W_and_C]

@PurpnGold

@W_and_C

Didn’t see any threads on this. IMO, this is obviously good. Discrimination is discrimination whether applied against minority or majority.

9-0 ruling with Ketanji Brown Jackson writing the opinion.

Supreme Court revives straight woman's discrimination claim

The unanimous ruling could make it easier in some parts of the country for people belonging to majority groups to bring such “reverse discrimination” claims. It overturns precedent in some lower courts that says someone from a majority group has to meet a higher bar than someone from a minority group for a case to move forward.

Marlean Ames sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace, after a lesbian woman obtained a promotion she had applied for. She was later demoted, and her old position was taken by a gay man.

This seemed unnecessary. Was there some precedent that said “majority” couldn’t be discriminated against by “minority”

Discrimination is discrimination. That wasn’t obvious?

I believe that the federal appeals court in this case did rule that a plaintiff for a majority group had a higher bar to clear to prove their discrimination claim.

SCOTUS did not conclude that the plaintiff was actually discriminated against , merely that the case can proceed.

[biggestal99]

@W_and_C

I believe that the federal appeals court in this case did rule that a plaintiff for a majority group had a higher bar to clear to prove their discrimination claim.

SCOTUS did not conclude that the plaintiff was actually discriminated against , merely that the case can proceed.

correct. what there was, was a double standard of proof for minority group and majority group plaintiffs. SCOTUS evened the playing field.
easy call.

Allan

[PurpnGold]

@biggestal99

@W_and_C

I believe that the federal appeals court in this case did rule that a plaintiff for a majority group had a higher bar to clear to prove their discrimination claim.

SCOTUS did not conclude that the plaintiff was actually discriminated against , merely that the case can proceed.

correct. what there was, was a double standard of proof for minority group and majority group plaintiffs. SCOTUS evened the playing field.
easy call.

Allan

Oh well then this is a great ruling. Shouldn’t be a double standard for the bar.

[DougBH]

@PurpnGold

This seemed unnecessary. Was there some precedent that said “majority” couldn’t be discriminated against by “minority”

Discrimination is discrimination. That wasn’t obvious?

It wasn’t unnecessary because it was an issue oof law in the case. From the article referenced:

“It overturns precedent in some lower courts that says someone from a majority group has to meet a higher bar than someone from a minority group for a case to move forward.“

[SixFoot]

It wasn’t “reverse discrimination” it was discrimination.

[conan]

@PurpnGold

Discrimination is discrimination. That wasn’t obvious?

But yet your side was pushing for discrimination.

[biggestal99]

@DougBH

“It overturns precedent in some lower courts that says someone from a majority group has to meet a higher bar than someone from a minority group for a case to move forward.“

equality now. as it should be.

Allan

[biggestal99]

@conan

But yet your side was pushing for discrimination

our side?

it was 9-0 at SCOTUS.

no brainer opinion.

Allan