I Prayed have prayed
Lord, in a culture increasingly torn by identity, labels, and division, help Your people be peacemakers.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

The United States Supreme Court has revived a lawsuit filed by an Ohio woman who claims she was denied an employment opportunity because she’s heterosexual.

Pray for your fellow intercessor.

 

In aĀ unanimous opinionĀ issued Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled inĀ Marlean Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth ServicesĀ that a lower court decision against Ames is to be reconsidered.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson authored the court opinion, taking issue with an earlier appeals court decision which denied Ames’ complaint on the basis of ā€œbackground circumstances.ā€

The ā€œbackground circumstancesā€ rule stipulates that a person belonging to a majority group has a greater burden of proof to show that they were discriminated against on the basis of identity.

ā€œWe hold that this additional ā€˜background circumstances’ requirement is not consistent with Title VII’s text or our case law construing the statute,ā€ wrote Jackson. ā€œAccordingly, we vacate the judgment below and remand for application of the proper prima facie standard.ā€

Jackson noted that the earlier ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit against Ames wrongfully used the ā€œbackground circumstancesā€ standard.

ā€œThe court then recounted how Ames was qualified, had been denied a promotion in favor of a gay candidate, and was later demoted in favor of another gay candidate — evidence that would ordinarily satisfy her prima facie burden — before it specifically faulted Ames for failing to make the ā€˜requisite showing of ā€˜background circumstances,ā€™ā€ she continued.

ā€œIn short, the Sixth Circuit expressly based its holding affirming summary judgment in favor of the agency on Ames’s failure to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard. Ohio’s attempt to recast the ā€˜background circumstances’ rule as an application of the ordinary prima facie standard thus misses the mark by a mile.ā€

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a concurring opinion, being joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, in which he wanted ā€œto highlight the problems that arise when judges create atextual legal rules and frameworks.ā€

ā€œJudge-made doctrines have a tendency to distort the underlying statutory text, impose unnecessary burdens on litigants, and cause confusion for courts,ā€ Thomas wrote. ā€œThe ā€˜background circumstances’ rule — correctly rejected by the Court today — is one example of this phenomenon.ā€

Ames began working for the Ohio Department of Youth Services in 2004, serving in various capacities over the years. In 2019, she applied for a new position, but did not get it. Shortly thereafter, she was demoted to a lower-paying job.

A heterosexual woman, Ames’ previous position was filled by a homosexual man, while the position she had applied for was given to a homosexual woman.

Ames filed a complaint in a federal court in Ohio, claiming discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in violation of federal law.

In December 2023, a three-judge panel of the Sixth CircuitĀ ruled againstĀ Ames, issuing a per curiam opinion that upheld a district court ruling against her.

The circuit panel had concluded that Ames ā€œlacked evidence of ā€˜background circumstances’ necessary to establishing her prima-facie case for her claim based on sexual orientationā€ and ā€œlacked evidence of pretext for purposes of her sex-discrimination claim.ā€

ā€œAmes’s only evidence of a pattern of discrimination against heterosexuals is her own demotion and the denial of the Bureau Chief position,ā€ read the circuit opinion.

ā€œUnder our caselaw, however, a plaintiff cannot point to her own experience to establish a pattern of discrimination.ā€

What do you think of this? Share your thoughts and prayers below.

This article was originally published at The Christian Post. Photo Credit: Ian Hutchinson on Unsplash.

Comments (2) Print

Comments

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

DrRuth Charles
June 6, 2025

This maltreatment is a sad reality. Our warfare is not against humans but disembodied darkness and spiritual wickedness in high positions and heavenly realms. If we as The Body of CHRIST does not unify in love for GOD and each other then GOD will not be magified over the rhetoric of the world’s system; therefore having little to no possibility of being saved. #OneNationUnderGOD

1
Rose Rocha
June 6, 2025

Lord, thank you that the court ruled base on common sense. A person should be promoted on merit not on anything else. God may you will be done in the courts here on earth as it is in heaven.

3

Partner with Us

Intercessors for America is the trusted resource for millions of people across the United States committed to praying for our nation. If you have benefited from IFA's resources and community, please consider joining us as a monthly support partner. As a 501(c)3 organization, it's through your support that all this possible.

Dave Kubal
IFA President
Become a Monthly Partner

Share

Click below to share this with others

Log in to Join the Conversation

Log in to your IFA account to start a discussion, comment, pray, and interact with our community.