Politics
Supreme Court rules discrimination laws protect all equally, including 'majority group' members
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the nation’s anti-discrimination laws apply equally to all employees, regardless of whether those complaining of bias are white or Black, gay or straight.
In a short and unanimous opinion, the justices rejected as outdated and mistaken the view that “members of a majority group” must show more evidence of discrimination before they can sue and win.
Instead, the justices said the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has always prohibited workplace discrimination against “any individual” who suffers discrimination because of race, color, religion, national origin and sex, including sexual orientation.
The law “draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said.
The ruling revives a discrimination lawsuit brought by Marlean Ames, an Ohio woman who said she was demoted and discriminated against by a lesbian who became her supervisor. She was then replaced by a gay man who had less experience.
Ames is a heterosexual woman. She sued her employer, the Ohio Department of Youth Services, and alleged she was discriminated against because of her sexual orientation.
But a federal judge rejected her discrimination claim, and the 6th Circuit Court in Cincinnati affirmed that decision. In doing so, the judges said she could not point to “background circumstances” or statistical evidence suggesting that hers was the “unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”
Law students at the University of Virginia Law School appealed her case to the Supreme Court. They pointed out that the 6th Circuit and several other courts continue to use an outdated, two-track approach to discrimination claims.
This is not the standard in much of the nation, however. For example, they said the 9th Circuit Court based in California does not follow this approach, which would require more proof of discrimination from whites or men or heterosexuals.
But the law students said the court should hear the Ames case and clarify the law nationwide.
Although the case did not directly involve DEI, or diversity, equity and inclusion, it gained added attention because of President Trump’s drive to rid the government of DEI policies.
Jackson said the Supreme Court for more than 50 years has steadily rejected the view that discrimination laws apply differently to different groups of people.
In Griggs vs. Duke Power in 1971, “we said that ‘[d]iscriminatory preference for any group, minority or majority, is precisely and only what Congress has proscribed.’”
A few years later, the court rejected the two-track approach, she said, “holding that Title VII [of the Civil Rights Act] prohibited racial discrimination against the white petitioners in th[at] case upon the same standards as would be applicable were they Negroes.”
Lawyers for the Biden and Trump administrations had urged the court to overrule the 6th Circuit and make clear there is no double standard for deciding discrimination claims
In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas noted the “majority” in the workplace differs by workplace.
“Women make up the majority of employees in certain industries, such as teaching and nursing, but the minority in other industries, such as construction.”
“Defining the ‘majority’ is even more difficult in the context of race,” he wrote. “American families have become increasingly multicultural, and attempts to divide us all up into a handful of groups have become only more incoherent with time.”
The court’s ruling in Ames vs. Ohio Department of Youth Services said the Ohio court should reopen and reconsider Ames’ claim of discrimination.
Experts in discrimination law said the decision will have an effect in some regions but not others.
“As a practical matter, more ‘reverse discrimination’ lawsuits may survive a motion to dismiss,” said Evan Parness, an attorney at the Covington law firm in New York.
Although the decision doesn’t significantly change how federal district courts in California operate, it has implications for some courts in other parts of the country that require the higher burden of proof, said Elizabeth Beske, professor of law at American University in Washington.
The “background circumstances” rule was first applied in D.C. courts, after a white man sued the Baltimore and Ohio railroad company arguing he was discriminated against when jobs were instead given to Black and female applicants. The court held that “it defie[d] common sense to suggest that the promotion of a Black employee justifies an inference of prejudice against white co-workers in our present society.”
Columbia Law professor Olatunde C. Johnson said the “opinion is not surprising. It depends on a straightforward and sensible statutory reading of Title VII. The 6th Circuit’s ‘background circumstances’ approach was not typical, so I don’t expect the case to dramatically change employment discrimination litigation on the ground.”
Brian McGinnis, an attorney with the firm Fox Rothschild, said because the decision was unanimous, which is rare, it shows an uncontroversial and “pretty straightforward” perspective that there is no historical basis in case law for requiring extra proof from white, heterosexual or other majority groups.
And it represents an effort by the court to streamline and eliminate the need for additional steps in litigation, he said.
There is some question as to how the change is applied, but McGinnis doesn’t expect any issues.
“There is some potential for mischief, but I don’t think it will have much change on the day-to-day operations of many employers or courts,” McGinnis said. “The short answer is, it should not change much.”
Savage reported from Washington and Hussain from Los Angeles.
Politics
Byron Donalds cracks down on persistent border blind spot leaving US vulnerable to overstays
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: Florida Republican Rep. Byron Donalds introduced legislation that would require biometric tracking of every entry and exit from the United States, as part of a Republican push to crack down on visa overstays and fraudulent immigration documents.
With illegal crossings down sharply under President Donald Trump’s second term, Republicans are shifting toward the next phase of immigration enforcement — tracking visa overstays and closing documentation loopholes. Donalds’ bill aims to force full nationwide use and federal oversight of the biometric entry-exit system.
Donalds told Fox News Digital exclusively he introduced the legislation on Monday.
“Thanks to President Trump’s decisive actions, our borders are more secure than they have been in decades. We are now moving to finish the job by introducing the Reform Immigration Through Biometrics Act, which provides the oversight needed to ensure every entry and exit is fully verified,” Donalds told Fox News Digital.
FLORIDA SHERIFF SAYS ICE PARTNERSHIP ONLY THE BEGINNING IN ILLEGAL MIGRANT CRACKDOWN
Congressman Byron Donalds is introducing Reform Immigration Through Biometrics Act to tighten immigration enforcement nationwide. (Paul Ratje / AFP via Getty Images)
The bill would close gaps to ensure full coverage at every port, provide system flow updates, and identify what is “slowing” it down by requiring DHS to report to congress. The biometric data system collects fingerprints, facial images, and iris scans.
Immigration reform is a central focus of the second Trump administration, with officials shifting attention toward internal tracking and enforcement gaps, not just border crossings.
The biometric entry-exit system was first introduced a decade ago, following a 2004 recommendation from the 9/11 Commission to strengthen national security through a comprehensive tracking method.
HOUSE GOP BILL COULD TRIGGER SELF-DEPORTATION FOR SOMALI REFUGEES AMID MINNESOTA FRAUD PROBE
Previous administrations failed to fully implement the system across all ports of entry, leaving it incomplete. A final rule issued in December 2025 now mandates a nationwide rollout.
Donalds’ legislation aims to ensure it is fully executed this time by holding DHS accountable.
“The border has been secured, but the work is far from over,” said Donalds in a press release. “Visa overstays and fraudulent documentation remain a large piece of the overall illegal immigration puzzle that needs to be addressed.”
Byron Donalds, a Florida lawmaker and gubernatorial candidate, unveiled legislation cracking down on immigration overstays. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
Data from the Border Patrol cited by Pew Research found there were 237,538 migrant encounters at the Mexican border in 2025. It is the lowest number since Richard Nixon was president in 1970 when 201,780 were encountered.
I REPRESENT A BORDER DISTRICT THAT WAS SWAMPED BY ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. WHAT I’M SEEING NOW MIGHT SURPRISE YOU
Migrants wait in line to turn themselves in for processing to US Customs and Border Protection border patrol agents near the Paso del Norte Port of Entry after crossing the US-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas, on May 9, 2023. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP)
Donalds, candidate for Florida governor to succeed term-limited Gov. Ron DeSantis, said he anticipates “swift passage” of the bill.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Republicans are steadfast in our commitment to the mandate entrusted to us by the American people,” he told Fox News Digital.
Fox News Digital reached out to DHS for comment.
Former state Controller Betty Yee dropped out of the governor’s race on Monday, citing low levels of support from voters and donors.
Yee, a Democrat, was part of a sprawling field of politicians vying to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. But despite the bevy of prominent candidates running to lead the nation’s most populous state and the world’s fourth-largest economy, this year’s governor’s race has lacked a clear front-runner well known by the electorate.
“It was becoming clear that the donors were not going to be there. Even some of my former supporters just felt like they needed to move on as well,” Yee said in a virtual news conference Monday morning, adding that her internal polling showed voters did not prioritize “competence and experience … and that’s really been my wheelhouse in terms of how we grounded this campaign.”
The former two-term state controller did not immediately endorse another candidate and said she would take a few days to assess the field before making an announcement.
The race was upended this month when then-Rep. Eric Swalwell, among the leading Democrats in the contest, was accused of sexual assault and other misconduct. The East Bay Area Democrat, who is facing multiple criminal investigations, promptly ended his gubernatorial bid and resigned from Congress.
Yee said the contest would probably go down as “one of the most unusual, unpredictable and unsettling races in modern California history.”
“I certainly could not have imagined the twists and the disturbing turns that this race has taken,” she said. “But through it all, my values and my vision for California has never wavered.”
“Voters are scared right now, and I think they really are placing a lot of prominence on a fighter in chief against this Trump administration,” she said.
Though she was prepared to be a governor that would push back against the Trump administration, Yee said her calm demeanor did not help her grab attention.
“We are living in like a reality TV era, where to get traction, you have to either be the loudest, you have to have gimmicks. You’ve got to do what you’ve got to do to get attention. I got no gimmicks. I have no scandals,” she said before calling herself “Boring Betty.”
Yee, 68, was well regarded by Democrats during her tenure in Sacramento.
But she never had the financial resources to aggressively compete in a state with many of the most expensive media markets in the nation.
Yee reported raising nearly $583,000 in 2025 for her gubernatorial bid, according to campaign fundraising reports filed with the California secretary of state’s office. Yee’s announcement that she is dropping out of the race came days before the latest financial disclosures will be publicly reported.
Despite being elected to the state Board of Equalization twice and as state controller twice, Yee was not widely known by most Californians. She never cracked double digits in gubernatorial polls.
Her name will still appear on the ballot. She was among the candidates who rebuffed state Democratic Party leaders’ request this year to reconsider their viability amid fears that the party could be shut out of the November general election because of the state’s unique primary system. The top two vote-getters in the June primary will move on to the November general election, regardless of party affiliation.
Though California’s electorate is overwhelmingly Democratic, the makeup of the gubernatorial field makes it statistically possible for Republicans to win the top two spots if Democratic voters splinter among their party’s candidates. Yee said fear of that scenario playing out “kind of took over” the gubernatorial race.
“Was it possible? Yes. Was it plausible? No, we’re in California. That was not going to happen,” she said, adding that the top-two primary system “has got to go.”
The daughter of Chinese immigrants, Yee said she was disappointed that other Asian American donors and community members did not show up for her as “robustly” as they had in the past.
“We had the opportunity to make history,” she said. “I’m going to want to do a deep dive about … what was it about my campaign that just did not resonate with them.”
Still, Yee was beloved by Democratic Party activists and previously served as the party’s vice chair.
No Democratic candidate reached the necessary threshold to win the party’s official endorsement at its February convention, but Yee came in second with support from 17% of delegates despite calls for her to drop out of the race.
“Every poll shows that this race is wide open, and I know this party,” she said in an interview at the convention. “Frankly, I’ve been in positions where it’s been a crowded field, and we work hard and candidates emerge.”
Yee became emotional Monday as she thanked her supporters and family, including her husband, siblings and mother. “She’s now 103 years old, and her life and voice and wisdom are my compass,” Yee said.
The gubernatorial primary will take place June 2, though voters will start receiving mail ballots in about two weeks.
But while that is a new element in the talks, the cultural divide in how to negotiate is not.
That divide was evident 11 years ago, in the gilded halls of the 160-year-old Beau-Rivage Palace Hotel in Lausanne, Switzerland, where Secretary of State John Kerry and his counterparts from five other countries struggled to close a preliminary agreement with Iran. It was, perhaps, the closest analogue to what is unfolding now in Islamabad.
Every day the American delegation would speak about how many centrifuges had to be disassembled and how much uranium needed to be shipped out of country. Yet when Iranian officials — including Abbas Araghchi, now the Iranian foreign minister — stepped out of the elegant, chandeliered rooms to brief reporters, most of the questions about those details were waved away. The Iranians talked about preserving respect for their rights and Iran’s sovereignty.
“I remember we finally got the parameters agreed upon at the hotel,” Wendy Sherman, the chief U.S. negotiator at the time, said on Monday. “And then a few days later the supreme leader came out and said, ‘Actually, some very different terms were required.’”
Ms. Sherman, who went on to become deputy secretary of state in the Biden administration, would go into these negotiations with a large posse. She often had the C.I.A.’s top Iran expert in the room, or nearby. So was the energy secretary, Ernest Moniz, an expert in nuclear weapons design. Proposals floated by the Iranians would be sent back to the U.S. national laboratories, where weapons are designed and tested, for expert analysis of whether the agreements being discussed would keep Iran at least a year away from a bomb.
But Mr. Trump’s negotiating team travels light, with no entourage of experts and few briefings. Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, the president’s son-in-law and the special envoy, learned their negotiating skills in New York real estate and say a deal is a deal. They say they have immersed themselves in the details of the Iran program, and know it well.
-
Culture5 minutes agoBook Review: ‘Permanence,’ by Sophie Mackintosh
-
Lifestyle11 minutes agoHow ‘The Devil Wears Prada 2’ Red Carpet Looks Came Together
-
Technology23 minutes agoThe Vergecast Vergecast, 2026 edition
-
World29 minutes agoMexico pyramid shooter who took hostages and killed 1 is identified
-
Politics35 minutes agoByron Donalds cracks down on persistent border blind spot leaving US vulnerable to overstays
-
Health41 minutes agoHealthy diets spark lung cancer risk in non-smokers as pesticides loom
-
Sports47 minutes agoPGA Tour signals new era with axing of Hawaii events from schedule
-
Technology53 minutes agoAlexa+ lets you order food like a real conversation