Good morning!
A new case in front of the Supreme Court could change the employment landscape for years to come, and the way that HR teams around the country do business.
On Wednesday, the court heard arguments presented by Marlean Ames, an Ohio woman who claims she was discriminated against after her job at a juvenile corrections facility was given to a younger gay man. Ames, who is straight, says she was also previously passed over for a separate internal role, which was given to a woman who identifies as lesbian, but had significantly less experience.
Traditionally, employment law has held that people from “majority groups,” including men, white people, and people who identify as straight, have faced a higher bar to prove that they are the victims of discrimination, compared to people from traditionally marginalized groups.
But the justices appeared receptive to arguments from Ames’ lawyers this week, the Washington Post reported, and multiple legal experts tell Fortune that they expect them to make a unanimous decision in Ames’ favor. Or as Raye Mitchell, an entertainment and employment law attorney puts it, “in their view, discrimination is discrimination” no matter who brings the case.
As a result, if the decision does go through, it will likely be easier for people who belong to majority groups to sue their employers for discrimination. “It’s going to become a lot easier for proponents who are anti-DEI to be able to prove their claims in court,” Chris Braham, a...
A recent Ninth Circuit decision underscores why importers should be worried that they will be hit with a large government bill under the False Claims Act (FCA) to pay for newly raised duties impose...