The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled in favor of an Ohio woman who wants to bring an employment discrimination claim against the state, alleging she was passed over for a job on the basis of her heterosexual orientation.

       Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson delivered the opinion.

       The plaintiff, Marlean Ames, alleges her employer, the Ohio Department of Youth Services, denied her a promotion and later demoted her, in both cases selecting gay candidates instead who were less qualified. Her supervisor at the time was also gay.

       Ames had worked for the Department for more than 15 years and received sterling performance reviews.

       Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual orientation.

       MORE: Woman takes 'reverse' discrimination case to Supreme Court over hiring of gay co-workers

       Marlean Ames in her lawyer's office in Akron, OH on February 20, 2025.

       Maddie McGarvey/For The Washington Post via Getty Images

       In order to bring a case in federal court, plaintiffs must initially present a prima facie case -- Latin for "on the face of it" -- a legal term to indicate that there are sufficient facts to support a claim.

       Justice Jackson, writing for the court, said that Ames had been unfairly held to a higher legal standard as a member of a majority group.

       "The question in this case is whether, to satisfy that prima facie burden, a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group must also show 'background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority,'" Jackson wrote, quoting the decision from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

       "We hold that this additional 'background circumstances' requirement is not consistent with Title VII’s text or our case law construing the statute. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment below and remand for application of the proper prima facie standard."

       The ruling means Ames' lawsuit can move forward, but it does not necessarily mean she will succeed in her case against her former employer.