This Note will argue that the Supreme Court should resolve the inconsistency within the federal system concerning the appropriate standard of proof in reverse discrimination disputes by adopting the reasoning set forth by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Section II will profile the history and purpose of Title VII, with emphasis on the "burden shifting" framework established by the Supreme Court to analyze claims of racial discrimination in the workplace. Section III will contrast the development of the "background circumstances" test applied by lower federal courts to discrimination claims brought by majority plaintiffs with the Supreme Court's recognition of equal treatment for all racial groups, minority and majority. Section IV will examine recent circuit court decisions that indicate a movement towards majority support for the rejection of different standards of proof in race discrimination cases based upon the majority or minority status of the plaintiff. Lastly, Section V will analyze how the Supreme Court should resolve the controversy surrounding the altered standard of proof in reverse discrimination cases.
Note, Iadimarco v. Runyon and Reverse Discrimination: Gaining Majority Support for Majority Plaintiffs, 48 Clev. St. L. Rev. 579 (2000)