The proper term for a Supreme Court session where the justices hear verbal presentations by lawyers is an “oral argument,” but Wednesday’s hearing in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services hardly qualified as an argument. Everyone, on every side of the case, agreed that a strange rule governing employment discrimination suits in some parts of the country needs to go.

As Justice Neil Gorsuch quipped at one point, there appears to be “radical agreement.”

Ames involves a rule that exists in some federal appeals courts that requires employment discrimination plaintiffs who are in the “majority” to carry a slightly higher evidentiary burden than plaintiffs who are part of a minority group. This particular case involves a straight woman who was denied a promotion and later demoted. In both cases, the position she wanted was filled by a gay employee.

In most federal courts, plaintiffs who are in the majority are treated no........

© Vox