Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the worker in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that the “Sixth Circuit’s ‘background circumstances’ rule—which requires members of a majority group to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard to prevail on a Title VII claim—cannot be squared with the text of Title VII or the Court’s precedents.” Along with the Biden Administration, NELA filed an amicus brief on behalf of the worker in Ames, authored by renowned Supreme Court practitioner Professor Eric Schnapper. In light of the expected unanimous result in favor of Ames and against the “background circumstances” test, NELA focused its brief on asking the Court to clarify that no workers should be subject to an overly rigid application of McDonnell Douglas at the summary judgment stage, a call that was endorsed by other civil rights organizations.
The Court spoke to the issue. While the holding was narrowly focused on the “background circumstances” test, both the majority and concurring opinions emphasized the importance of flexibility when courts apply McDonnell Douglas. Justice Jackson’s opinion for the majority noted: “The ‘background circumstances’ rule also ignores our instruction to avoid inflexible applications of McDonnell Douglas’s first prong. … Read More