Perkins Coie is a premier international law firm with over a century of experience, dedicated to addressing the legal and business challenges of tomorrow. Renowned for its deep industry knowledge and client-centric approach, the firm has consistently partnered with trailblazing organizations, from aviation pioneers to artificial intelligence innovators. With 21 offices across the United States, Asia, and Europe, and a global network of partner firms, Perkins Coie provides seamless support to clients wherever they operate.
The firm's vision is to be the trusted advisor to the world’s most innovative companies, delivering strategic, high-value solutions critical to their success. Guided by a one-firm culture, Perkins Coie emphasizes excellence, collaboration, inclusion, innovation, and creativity. The firm is committed to building diverse teams, promoting equal access to justice, and upholding the rule of law, reflecting its core values and enduring dedication to clients, communities, and colleagues.
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that members of a majority group are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard to prevail on a Title VII discrimination claim.
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous
decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services,
holding that members of a majority group are not required to meet a
heightened evidentiary standard to prevail on a Title VII
discrimination claim.
This case—which lowers the bar for "reverse
discrimination" claims—reached the Supreme Court after
several federal courts of appeals had imposed an additional burden
on majority-group plaintiffs requiring them to present
"background circumstances" evidence, such as statistical
data demonstrating a pattern of discrimination, to establish a
prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII. The Supreme
Court rejected this approach in Ames. The Ames
decision serves as a critical reminder that decisions affecting
any employees must be based on legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reasons, as members of majority and minority
groups are equally positioned to pursue discrimination claims. The
ruling may also embolden legal challenges to DEI programs,
underscoring the importance of carefully reviewing such programs to
ensure compliance with applicable law.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
