Supreme Court to rule on if it should be harder for white and straight people to prove discrimination at work

A straight white Ohio woman is accusing her workplace of discriminating against her by giving preferential treatment to her gay and male coworkers in Supreme Court.

Marlean Ames, 60, has filed a lawsuit against The Ohio Department of Youth Services - claiming that she was passed over for a promotion and then demoted from her job because she is heterosexual.

Ames was first employed by the federal department in 2004 and a decade later, was promoted to Administrator of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA). 

In 2017, the seasoned employee was assigned a new supervisor, Ginine Trim - a gay woman - who further reported to Assistant Director Julie Walburn - a straight woman.

She claims that this was the moment in her career that things began to go downhill for her. 

According to court documents, Ames applied and interviewed to be the Department's Bureau Chief of Quality in April 2019 but she was rejected. 

She claims that 'Trim congratulated Ames on 30 years of public service but also suggested that she retire' in an interview after the rejection'. 

The role was ultimately given to Yolanda Frierson, a gay woman. 

Furthermore, the lawsuit alleges that four days after being congratulated for her service, Walburn fired Ames from her job and asked her to return to her old position. 

'Four days later, on May 10, 2019, Walburn and Human Resources Administrator Robin Gee called Ames into a meeting where they terminated her as PREA Administrator and gave her the option of returning to her previous position, which would amount to a demotion.

'Ames took the demotion, reducing her wages from $47.22 an hour to $28.40.' 

Her role as PREA Administrator was given to Alexander Stojsavljevic, a 25-year-old gay man. 

Court documents state that the 'department discriminated against her when it denied her a promotion to Bureau Chief and demoted her from the position of PREA Administrator'. 

The lawsuit was filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the landmark federal law banning workplace discrimination based on traits including race, sex, religion and national origin.

A trial court and the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled against Ames but Supreme Court justices agreed to review an appellate ruling that upheld the dismissal of the lawsuit on October 4. 

According to the law, those alleging workplace bias have to show 'background circumstances,' including that LGBTQ people made the decisions affecting Ames or statistical evidence showing a pattern of discrimination against members of the majority group.

The appeals court noted that Ames didn't provide any such circumstances. 

She is yet to provide such evidence and has asked the Supreme Court to allow her an extension to file a 'writ of certiorari' - which is described as a request to order a lower court to send the case record for review to the Justices. 

A Supreme Court ruling in favor of Ames could provide a boost to the growing number of lawsuits by white and straight workers claiming they were discriminated against under company diversity, equity and inclusion policies.

The court will hear arguments in the case in its new term, which begins on October 7 and a decision is expected by the end of June 2025.