By: Claire Sweetman
Kroger CEO Resigns Following Investigation
Kroger Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Rodney McMullen resigned on Monday, March 3, 2025, after an investigation into his conduct found that his behavior violated the company’s corporate code of ethics.[1] Although little detail concerning the allegations is known, a spokesperson for Kroger reported that on February 21, 2025, the Board became aware of “certain personal conduct” by McMullen. An external investigation by outside counsel found that McMullen’s conduct was “unrelated to the business” and did not involve Kroger employees – still, his behavior was found to be “inconsistent with Kroger’s Policy on Business Ethics.”[2] McMullen joined Kroger in 1978 as a part-time stocker. He rose to the rank of CEO in 2014 and held the position since. While the company begins its search for a new CEO, they have appointed Ron Sargent, Kroger’s lead director, as interim chief executive.[3]
U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument in Reverse Sex Discrimination Case
On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that will determine whether a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group must meet a higher burden to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII.[4] The plaintiff, a heterosexual woman, applied for a promotion at the Ohio Department of Youth Services (the “Department”) in 2019, but was not selected. Shortly thereafter, the plaintiff alleged that her supervisor suggested that she retire and then demoted her in May 2019. The Department then hired a twenty-five year-old gay man for the position. Later, a gay woman received the promotion that the plaintiff had applied for. The plaintiff sued the Department alleging discrimination based on sexual orientation and sex under Title VII.[5]
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio granted summary judgment in favor of the Department, arguing that the plaintiff had failed to meet her burden of proving a prima facie case.[6] The court reasoned that the plaintiff did not demonstrate “background circumstances” to support the argument that the employer discriminated against a majority. The court also ruled that the plaintiff lacked evidence of pretext for her sex discrimination claim. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed.[7]
On February 26, 2025, Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that all advocates were in agreement that the background circumstances doctrine was an improper bar to plaintiffs establishing a prima facie case. However, neither side agreed as to whether the Court should give guidance as to what is required for establishing a prima facie case. Justice Gorsuch’s statement that a heightened burden should not be applied to majority groups is significant – indeed, it suggests that the floodgates may open for more Title VII reverse discrimination claims.[8]
[1] https://www.npr.org/2025/03/03/nx-s1-5316236/kroger-ceo-rodney-mcmullen-resigns.
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] https://www.lawandtheworkplace.com/2025/02/u-s-supreme-court-hears-oral-argument-in-reverse-sex-discrimination-case/
[5] Id.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Id.