The Supreme Court handed down some pretty significant rulings on Thursday, with the Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services case being one of them.

The court ruled unanimously in favor of an Ohio woman who claimed "reverse discrimination," and who alleged she was passed over for a job promotion because she wasn't gay. The nation's highest court found that she could proceed with her lawsuit in the lower courts after she was initially shut down by a federal district court that used standards which the SCOTUS threw out with this ruling:

The Supreme Court on Thursday sided with a straight woman who claimed she faced bias in the workplace after she was passed over for positions that went to gay colleagues.

The decision will make it easier for members of groups that historically have not faced discrimination to prove bias claims.

The justices unanimously struck down a standard used in nearly half the nation’s federal circuits that required people who are White, male or not gay to meet a higher bar to prove workplace bias in certain cases than do individuals whose minority communities have traditionally faced discrimination.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who wrote the opinion for the court, agreed with Marlean Ames, who argued that it was unconstitutional to have different standards for different groups of people.

Ames is unanimous: "the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group." Rejects higher standard for 'reverse' discrimination vs heterosexuals.

— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) June 5, 2025

🚨UNANIMOUS

The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the rights of a straight woman who claimed she was discriminated against in the workplace.

Ames v. Ohio sets an important precedent, and Ketanji Brown Jackson‼️ delivered the unanimous opinion of the court… pic.twitter.com/zzlYK1F7qh

— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) June 5, 2025

SEE ALSO -->> By the Numbers: Some Surprising (and Not-Surprising) Stats About the Federal Judiciary (Part 1)

As RedState also reported, the court unanimously sided with Smith & Wesson Brands, rejecting the case brought forth by Mexico's government, which sought billions of dollars in damages, in a clear win for gunmakers.

"Mexico alleges that the companies aided and abetted unlawful sales routing guns to Mexican drug cartels. The question presented is whether Mexico's complaint plausibly pleads that conduct. We conclude it does not," Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan noted in the opinion she wrote for the court.

Editor's Note: This article was updated post-publication for clarity.

Help RedState to keep reporting the truth about the Trump administration's accomplishments as we continue to usher in the Golden Era of America. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.