
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


What happens when the traditional understanding of workplace discrimination is turned on its head? Will the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services change how discrimination cases are evaluated when brought by members of majority groups?
Attorney Leah Stiegler of Woods Rogers joins us to examine this decision that rejected the "background circumstances rule" -- a standard that previously imposed a heightened evidentiary burden on white, heterosexual, or male plaintiffs claiming discrimination. As Leah explains, "There's no such thing as reverse discrimination. It's just discrimination." This simple yet insightful statement captures the essence of the Court's reasoning that Title VII protections apply equally to all employees, regardless of their demographic status.
Leah shares results from mock trials conducted with identical facts in different Virginia jurisdictions. A conservative Lynchburg jury awarded a white male plaintiff $600,000, while a more liberal Richmond jury found no discrimination whatsoever with the exact same evidence. This highlights how geography and community values dramatically influence discrimination case outcomes, sometimes more than the legal standards themselves.
We also explore the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework that remains the analytical backbone of discrimination cases, the emerging concept of intersectional discrimination, and recent executive orders concerning religious expression in the workplace. Throughout our discussion, Leah offers practical insights for employers navigating these evolving issues, emphasizing that while the political discourse around DEI initiatives may be contentious, the fundamental prohibition against discrimination remains unchanged.
Whether you're an employer developing workplace policies, an HR professional conducting training, or an employee trying to understand your rights, this episode provides essential context for understanding how discrimination law is evolving in unexpected ways. Subscribe to the Emerging Litigation Podcast for more in-depth analysis of the legal issues shaping our workplaces and society.
This is Leah's second appearance on the podcast and I appreciate it!
Tom Hagy
Host | The Emerging Litigation Podcast
______________________________________
Thanks for listening!
If you like what you hear please give us a rating. You'd be amazed at how much that helps.
If you have questions for Tom or would like to participate, you can reach him at [email protected].
Ask him about creating this kind of content for your firm -- podcasts, webinars, blogs, articles, papers, and more.
By Tom Hagy4.7
1919 ratings
What happens when the traditional understanding of workplace discrimination is turned on its head? Will the Supreme Court's unanimous ruling in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services change how discrimination cases are evaluated when brought by members of majority groups?
Attorney Leah Stiegler of Woods Rogers joins us to examine this decision that rejected the "background circumstances rule" -- a standard that previously imposed a heightened evidentiary burden on white, heterosexual, or male plaintiffs claiming discrimination. As Leah explains, "There's no such thing as reverse discrimination. It's just discrimination." This simple yet insightful statement captures the essence of the Court's reasoning that Title VII protections apply equally to all employees, regardless of their demographic status.
Leah shares results from mock trials conducted with identical facts in different Virginia jurisdictions. A conservative Lynchburg jury awarded a white male plaintiff $600,000, while a more liberal Richmond jury found no discrimination whatsoever with the exact same evidence. This highlights how geography and community values dramatically influence discrimination case outcomes, sometimes more than the legal standards themselves.
We also explore the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework that remains the analytical backbone of discrimination cases, the emerging concept of intersectional discrimination, and recent executive orders concerning religious expression in the workplace. Throughout our discussion, Leah offers practical insights for employers navigating these evolving issues, emphasizing that while the political discourse around DEI initiatives may be contentious, the fundamental prohibition against discrimination remains unchanged.
Whether you're an employer developing workplace policies, an HR professional conducting training, or an employee trying to understand your rights, this episode provides essential context for understanding how discrimination law is evolving in unexpected ways. Subscribe to the Emerging Litigation Podcast for more in-depth analysis of the legal issues shaping our workplaces and society.
This is Leah's second appearance on the podcast and I appreciate it!
Tom Hagy
Host | The Emerging Litigation Podcast
______________________________________
Thanks for listening!
If you like what you hear please give us a rating. You'd be amazed at how much that helps.
If you have questions for Tom or would like to participate, you can reach him at [email protected].
Ask him about creating this kind of content for your firm -- podcasts, webinars, blogs, articles, papers, and more.

43,957 Listeners

38,499 Listeners