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In a short and unanimous opinion, the justices rejected as outdated and mistaken the view that “members of a majority group” must show more evidence of discrimination before they can sue and win.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 They pointed out that the 6th Circuit and several other courts continue to use an outdated, two-track approach to discrimination claims.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.
Construction workers unfurled a large printed tarp to cover scaffolding installed at the White House’s front entrance. Doug Burgum, the interior secretary, said President Trump had ordered the repairs after noticing damage to columns.
Politics
WATCH: Trump’s Energy chief reveals what escalating Iran tensions could mean for gas prices
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Energy Secretary Chris Wright is telling Americans not to be concerned about the possibility of another surge of sharp increases in gasoline prices as tensions with Iran have started to escalate once again.
Asked whether Americans should worry about higher prices at the pump and how the Trump administration is preparing to keep the economy stable if the conflict continues to worsen, Wright told Fox News Digital: “It has not been any good behavior from Iran that’s allowed oil to flow. It’s been the United States military.”
“That’s not changing,” he assured, speaking from the Great American State Fair on the National Mall this week.
US CLAWS BACK KEY CONCESSION TO IRAN AFTER FRESH ATTACKS ON COMMERCIAL SHIPS IN STRAIT OF HORMUZ
(Mario Tama/Getty Images) (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
With Iran striking three commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz on Monday and Tuesday, Wright doubled down in urging citizens to not credit Iran for the U.S. military’s work to ensure oil shipments continue flowing through the strait.
“Look, the U.S. Military has been the key asset here,” he said. “They have assured the flow of oil and gas through the Strait of Hormuz throughout. Not at the beginning of this conflict, but through the last six weeks.”
Wright said the administration is closely monitoring global oil supplies as the tentative ceasefire with Iran seemingly came to come to a halt, with President Donald Trump telling Secretary-General Mark Rutte the call for peace with Iran is “over” at the NATO Summit in Turkey on Wednesday.
But, he pointed to the continued shipping through the Strait as evidence that markets should remain stable.
TRUMP SAYS IRAN CEASEFIRE IS ‘OVER’ AFTER IRANIAN ATTACKS TRIGGER MASSIVE US RESPONSE
President Donald Trump speaks at the White House on Tuesday, April 22. (AP/Alex Brandon)
“We’re of course constantly watching the supply of oil, the supply of refined products and what’s going on there,” Wright said. “And I think still all positive trends.”
Beyond geopolitical concerns, Wright also praised the new chain of discounted gas stations across Pennsylvania and New Jersey, Freedom Fuel, which promises customers prices below the national average.
The Trump administration, though not involved with the network, has heavily endorsed the new chain and its 25 locations.
“We love it,” Wright said when asked about Freedom Fuel. “I mean, look, any mechanism we can to lower energy costs for Americans of all kinds, we’re all in on.”
“With Freedom Fuels, they’re just lowering it down to their wholesale price of gasoline,” Wright said. “So they’re not making any money selling gasoline, but they’ve got convenience stores. That’s how most gas stations make money.”
NEWSOM UNDER FIRE AS CALIFORNIA GAS TAX HIKE SENDS PUMP PRICES EVEN HIGHER
Gasoline costs are a known concern for many Americans, and amid surging prices there has been a considerable increase in those opting to purchase electric vehicles to save money long-term at the pump — with Tesla dominating the market for these types of models.
Wright argued one of the benefits to living in America is having the option to choose what type of vehicle you drive.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“We just want people to buy what they would prefer,” he told Fox News Digital when asked his thoughts on increasing calls for support of the electrification of cars. “Consumer choice — you wanna buy an electric car, you wanna buy a gas powered car, diesel powered car, buy a big truck. That’s the choice.”
“That’s why you live in America. You get the choice of all those.”
In 2023, California regulators levied more than $100,000 in fines against the private operator of a federal immigration facility, kicking off a three-year battle over whether detainees who do work at the facilities should be considered employees.
The question went beyond semantics: If considered employees, the detainees would be subject to state worker protection laws.
A legal settlement announced this week now affirms that private immigrant detention facilities are subject to California’s workplace safety and health requirements.
“Every worker deserves a safe and healthy workplace and should be able to report workplace hazards without fear of retaliation,” said Denisse Gómez, spokesperson for the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health or Cal/OSHA.
“Individuals who perform work in these facilities are entitled to workplace safety protections, and this settlement reinforces Cal/OSHA’s commitment to enforcing those protections and safeguarding vulnerable workers,” she added.
Under the settlement between California and the GEO Group, a Florida-based private prison company, the company recently withdrew its legal challenges and agreed to pay more than $100,000 in the fines.
The GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment.
Back in 2023, Cal/OSHA issued $104,510 in fines against the GEO Group. The agency had found six violations of state code by the company after detainees complained about a lack of protective equipment and proper training while cleaning the facility for $1 per day.
Detainees alleged they routinely wiped black mold off shower walls at the facility, saw black dust spew from air vents and used cleaning solutions that lacked instructions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The biggest fine levied against the GEO Group was for failure to establish and maintain “effective written procedures to reduce employee risk of exposure to aerosol transmissible disease.”
Advocates viewed Cal/OSHA’S recognition of the detainees as workers as a victory that could pave the way for future labor rights fights at other detention centers in the state.
But the GEO Group appealed, arguing that detainees participating in ICE’s voluntary work program make their own schedules and aren’t employees, so hazard exposure couldn’t be “as a result of assigned duties,” as California law states. Plus, the company argued, there wasn’t enough evidence that detainees were exposed to any hazard.
Early last year, the state’s Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board rejected the GEO Group’s argument and found that detainees should be considered “affected employees.”
The GEO Group sued, but three days before a California Superior Court hearing in May, the company and Cal/OSHA reached the settlement.
Along with paying the fines, the GEO Group agreed to draft plans for avoiding aerosol transmissions at 12 secure and reentry facilities in California, including five detention centers that hold immigrants.
“GEO ensures detainees are afforded the necessary tools, equipment, and personal protective equipment … to safely and effectively perform any necessary tasks,” the settlement states.
Gómez said the settlement also leaves intact the appeals board’s ruling that civil immigration detainees who participate in work programs can participate in proceedings anonymously, “acknowledging the potential for retaliation when individuals raise workplace safety concerns.”
But the question of whether detainees are employees and deserve certain protections isn’t entirely resolved — at least not for the federal government.
Last month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement released new standards for detention facilities across the country. The revised guidelines “emphasize that detainee volunteers participating in the voluntary work program are not considered facility and/or government employees” and thus not entitled to labor regulations.
Attorney Mariel Villarreal said the timing of the new detention standards made her question whether the GEO Group had asked ICE to specify in its standards that detainees are not workers in response to its battle with Cal/OSHA.
“To me, it’s a reaction to this very settlement,” she said. Villarreal works for the California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice, which filed the original complaint on behalf of detainees who said they worked in unsafe conditions.
Villarreal pointed to a Washington Post report that GEO Group executives privately asked ICE to specify that detainees are not employees of the facilities where they work. Two top Trump administration officials, border czar Tom Homan and acting ICE director David Venturella, previously worked for the GEO Group.
New versions of ICE detention standards take effect as contracts are established or modified, so this year’s rules won’t immediately apply to every facility.
An ICE spokesperson did not comment about the settlement. The spokesperson, who did not provide their name in an emailed statement Wednesday, said the agency has begun transitioning detention facilities to meet the 2026 standards, “building on its longstanding commitment to safe, secure, and professional detention operations.”
“ICE has consistently implemented many of these best practices independently, reinforcing its role as the leader in detention operations,” the spokesperson added.
The GEO Group and other immigrant detention center operators have faced other legal battles over workers’ rights, including lawsuits in Washington, Colorado and California over the $1-per-day payment.
Villarreal said she’s confident that the Cal/OSHA settlement would continue to hold even if California facilities incorporated the new standards. But she said she believes the statements are an attempt by the GEO Group to “sidestep responsibility” and avoid the possibility of being fined under similar circumstances in other states.
“These statements in the new standards are a way for them to try and preserve profits as much as possible,” she said. “GEO and ICE are so intertwined at this point that they have the same motives.”
-
Finance40 seconds agoFrom Love Island to Precious Metals, Prediction Markets Are Changing Finance | PYMNTS.com
-
Fitness4 minutes ago80-year-old fitness icon Joan MacDonald reveals her simple exercise for a stronger, more stable core
-
Movie Reviews16 minutes ago‘Gail Daughtry and the Celebrity Sex Pass’ Review: We’re Off to Hump the Wizard
-
World23 minutes agoBacklash on ethanol-blend fuel intensifies in India, puts carmakers in the dock
-
Politics34 minutes ago
Crews Drape Tarp Over White House in Latest Trump Restoration
-
Health49 minutes agoGLP-1 Users’ Guide to Protein Snacks: Here’s What a Dietitian Actually Recommends
-
Lifestyle1 hour ago‘The Invite’ is a marriage comedy with sex and heart
-
Technology1 hour agoI spent a week using the Trump phone — it sucks
