The unanimous Supreme Court facilitated Thursday to bring litigation of so -called reverse discrimination, towed with an Ohio woman who claims that she did not get a job, and then was degraded because she was equal.
The judges’ decisions affect the litigation in 20 countries and the districts of Columbia, where the courts have so far set a higher Bar Association when members of the majority group, including those who are white and heterosexual, sued for discrimination under federal law.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote for the court that the Federal Civil Rights Act does not significantly significantly any distinction between most members of the majority and minority groups.
“By determining the same protection for each” individual “-regardless of the membership of this individual in the minority group or most-Conress, he left no room for courts that would determine the special requirements for the plaintiffs,” Jackson wrote.
The court ruled in appeal from Marlean Ames, who worked for Ohio Department of Youth Services for over 20 years.
Although he joined Jackson’s opinion, Judge Clarence Thomas noted in a separate opinion that some of the “largest and most prestigious employers in the country apparently discriminated against those that consider the so -called majority groups”.
Thomas, joined Judge Neil Gorsuch, quoted a shortly filed America First Legal, a conservative group founded by Trump Aide Stephen Miller to claim that “American employers have long been obsessed” by the initiatives of “diversity, justice and inclusion”.
Two years ago, the conservative majority of the court forbade the consideration of the race at the admission of the university. Since joining in January, President Donald Trump has ordered the termination of politician Dei in the Federal Government and tried to end government support Dei elsewhere. Some of the initiatives against the new administration were temporarily blocked in the Federal Court.
Jackson’s opinion did not mention Dei. Instead, she focused on Ames’ claim that she was handed over to promotion and was then degraded because he was heterosexual. Both she was looking for, and the one she held was given to people LGBTQ.
Head VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. The Court of Appeal and the US Court of Appeal ruled against Ames.
The sixth circuit is one of the courts that required another requirement for people such as Ames, indicating the “background circumstances” that could include LGBTQ people made decisions affecting Ames or statistical evidence of the discrimination of the majority group.
The Court of Appeal noted that Ames did not provide any such circumstances.
Jackson, however, wrote that the request of the “this additional” background “is not in line with the text of Head VII or our case -law law, which is the status that creates status.”
(Tagstotranslate) decision of the US Supreme Court (T) Reverse Discrimination (T) Marlean Ames (T) Ohio Department of Youth Services (T) Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson
