Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS Just ruled "Reverse Discrimination" IS Discrimination 9-0
X ^ | 06/05/25 | Chuck Callesto

Posted on 06/05/2025 7:49:19 AM PDT by Enlightened1

SCOTUS Just ruled "Reverse Discrimination" IS Discrimination 9-0

A rare UNANIMOUS ruling from the Supreme Court. Honestly, this should be obvious and never made it to the Supreme Court.

- June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that “reverse discrimination” is discrimination, siding with Marlean Ames, who claimed she was denied a promotion and demoted at the Ohio Department of Youth Services for being straight.

- The ruling eliminates the “background circumstances” requirement in 20 states, ensuring majority groups like straight or white employees face the same evidentiary standard under Title VII.

- Justice Ketanji "Woman?" Brown Jackson wrote the opinion, a rare unanimous decision showing even liberal justices rejected the unfair double standard

- Trump’s America First push to end DEI policies—his 50% approval rating reflects support for fairness. DEI IS INSTITUTIONAL RACISM

- The establishment media, like MSNBC, downplay the ruling’s impact, of course, framing it as a narrow decision because you do not hate Fake News enough


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: affirmativeaction; dei; discrimination; hitler; institutionalracism; itsokaytobewhite; ketanji; marleanames; ohio; reverse; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last
To: Enlightened1

What a novel concept, discrimination is discrimination.


41 posted on 06/05/2025 4:36:33 PM PDT by matt04 ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan

Even the hardcore socialists can’t figure out convincing and good-sounding arguments that they feel don’t make them look like idiots.

I mean they like to advance their agendas but as highly intelligent socialists, they also really don’t want to feel like they are going to be viewed as morons by most people and make the butt of jokes.


42 posted on 06/05/2025 4:59:32 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: matt04

📌👀


43 posted on 06/05/2025 5:00:39 PM PDT by Varsity Flight ( "War by 🙏 thoe prophesies set before you." I Timothy 1:18. Nazarite warriors. 10.5.6.5 These Days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: JSM_Liberty

It is correct that SCOTUS did not rule for Adams to get her job.

What they DID rule was much, much more important than that. They ruled that, going forward, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applied to white people.


44 posted on 06/05/2025 5:12:57 PM PDT by Jim Noble (Assez de mensonges et de phrases)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

No dissent? Bacche and its progeny are completely overturned? Hot diggidy.


45 posted on 06/05/2025 9:34:25 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (Every Goliath has his David. Child in need ofand thhere we CGM system. https://gofund.me/6452dbf1. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Finally! Their moment of clarity happened!


46 posted on 06/05/2025 10:16:34 PM PDT by luvie (🇺🇸The bravery of our troops keeping us safe & free make me proud to be an American.🇺🇸)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biblebelter

Amen. This was a few pieces of candy thrown out as a distraction.


47 posted on 06/06/2025 4:59:41 AM PDT by AbolishCSEU (Amount of "child" support paid is inversely proportionate to mother's actual parenting of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Affirmative action has been illegal, wrong and unconstitutional from the start.

Preferences in hiring, college admissions, contracting and promotions are wrong and unconstitutional.

DEI is another name for affirmative action.


48 posted on 06/07/2025 9:40:39 AM PDT by I want the USA back (America is once again GREAT! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Openurmind
This has been needed for at least 50 years. But one problem... States and the judicial will ignore it completely.

No, they won't. This was a mechanism to throw out cases before they reached the jury. If some courts still try to use it to throw out cases, the lawyers for the other side will file appeals on that issue, and they will win. I practiced employment law for 25 years - in one of the jurisdictions that had this rule -- and this isn't the kind of change that cannot be hidden or overlooked.

This is a real win, and it matters.

49 posted on 06/07/2025 8:57:50 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
It’s always been so...Why did this take so long.

This was a weird rule. It didn't say that discrimination against whites/males was legal -- it basically said you needed a bit more to prove it. In the vast majority of cases - for some rather technical legal reasons (I was an employment lawyer in a jurisdiction that followed this rule)- it never really became an issue. Also, because some sorts of racial/gender preferences were sort of tacitly permitted if they weren't too obvious, the rule survived.

But we knew even 15 years ago that the rule would one day be tossed. It just kind of flew below the radar. This is the most conservative SCOTUS since at least the 1930's, and they're doing some things that are long overdue. This case is a good example of that.

50 posted on 06/07/2025 9:12:15 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

No. What did DEI hack hire Brown extract from weakling Barrett for her vote on this issue?


51 posted on 06/09/2025 7:08:08 AM PDT by alstewartfan (Child slavery, rape and drug OD's mean nothing to Roberts and Barrett. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson