13 hours ago
5
You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.
The Supreme Court on Thursday made it easier for members of so-called majority groups to bring discrimination cases, but experts say the impact is likely to be limited.
June 6, 2025, 5:02 a.m. ET
A Supreme Court ruling on Thursday handed a victory to white Americans and straight people who believe they have been discriminated against in the workplace.
But just how widespread are those complaints?
President Trump and his allies have argued that discrimination against white Americans and straight people is a workplace scourge that often occurs under the cover of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. His administration has gone to great lengths to undo what it calls “illegal D.E.I.,” including ousting diversity officials from federal agencies and removing D.E.I. language from government websites.
Experts in employment law argue that the reality is more complicated, and say that the Supreme Court ruling is unlikely to drastically change the makeup of those filing and winning workplace discrimination cases.
“It will likely continue to be that a majority of discrimination cases are filed by minority-group members,” said Camille Olson, a partner at the management-side law firm Seyfarth Shaw. “But I think there will be an increasing number of cases that are filed by individuals who are either male or heterosexual or not a member of a minority race or religion.”
Federal government data suggest that members of so-called majority groups have historically brought only a small fraction of discrimination cases. Of the roughly 21,000 charges of race-based employment discrimination filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2021, only slightly more than 10 percent — about 2,350 — involved charges of discrimination against white people.
Ms. Olson said that such figures almost certainly understated the number of cases of discrimination against white people in the workplace, partly because the law in many parts of the country created an obstacle to litigating these cases.
