“I would never hire a white person under my watch.”
“A white girl … would never get a position under her watch.”
In most employment discrimination cases, there is no smoking gun. Most employers are smart enough to hide bias behind carefully worded evaluations or vague interview feedback. But sometimes, they do not. And when they say the quiet part out loud, a jury has every right to listen—and believe it.
In Miller v. Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation, 2025 WL 1506082, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld a jury’s finding that SMART, a public transportation agency in suburban Detroit, engaged in race/color discrimination against Gayann Miller when it denied her a promotion. Miller, a Caucasian bus driver who had worked at SMART since 2015, applied for a road-supervisor position in 2019. She met all the minimum qualifications and was granted a first-round interview but was not advanced to the second round. SMART claimed her answers were timid, hesitant, and lacked detail.
But the jury saw more. They heard that Miller had more experience and a better safety record than the two individuals who got the job—both of whom were Black and had documented performance problems. One of those candidates even gave similarly incorrect interview answers but was praised as “strong” and “detailed.”
Most importantly, the jury heard that Carol Martin, a supervisor on the hiring panel, told a coworker that a “white girl … would never get a position under her watch” and that she “would never hire a white person under [her] watch.” Martin denied making these comments. The jury heard both direct and circumstantial evidence of race discrimination—and chose to believe it, finding that there was race discrimination.
The jury awarded Miller $200,000 in compensatory damages. Following the verdict, the district court also awarded her $185,427.16 in attorney fees and costs. As the Sixth Circuit held, their decision had a legally sufficient basis and deserved to stand.
What Counts As Direct Evidence Of Race Discrimination?
In legal terms, direct evidence is evidence that, if believed, proves the fact of discriminatory intent without the need for inference or presumption. It is the type of proof that, on its face, shows an employer acted with unlawful motive—such as a decision-maker stating outright that race was a reason for a promotion denial.
Those quotes above? That is direct evidence.
Those are not just offensive. They are actionable.
Statements like these show clear discriminatory intent without the need for inference. As the Court held, this kind of evidence allows a jury to find intentional discrimination even without going through the full burden-shifting framework. Direct evidence hits different—and it can be enough to carry a case across the finish line.
Best Racial Discrimination Attorney Blogs on Point:
- Yes, You Can Be Fired For Saying “F*ck (Race) People”
- What Is Direct Evidence Of Employment Discrimination?
- Employers Should Not Say The Quiet Part Out Loud
- What Evidence Do I Need To Show Race Discrimination At Work?
How Can Circumstantial Evidence Support A Race Discrimination Claim?
In contrast to direct evidence, circumstantial evidence involves a set of facts that, taken together, allow a jury to infer discriminatory intent. It does not directly prove bias, but it creates a pattern or context that supports the conclusion that discrimination occurred. This type of evidence can include inconsistent justifications for employment actions, statistical disparities, or suspicious timing and treatment compared to similarly situated employees.
Even if the jury had never heard those quotes, Miller’s case was still strong.
The employer’s stated reason for not promoting Miller—poor interview performance—was undercut by the fact that one of the people who got the job also gave incorrect answers but was rated as having “strong” and “detailed” responses. More than that, Miller had years more experience and a better safety record than at least one of the selected candidates.
Then came the pattern evidence. Multiple white employees testified they had been passed over for promotions under Martin’s supervision. One colleague said he was told not to bother applying, and another was rejected seven times. The jury heard that no white candidate had been promoted during Martin’s tenure, while every successful applicant was Black.
The law allows employees to use this kind of comparative and pattern evidence to show pretext—that is, to show that the employer’s stated reason is not the real reason.
Best Race Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point:
- The Sixth Circuit Affirms that Holding Supervisors and/or Managers to a Higher Standard than Non-Supervisory Employees is not Circumstantial Evidence of Discrimination.
- You Don’t Need All Evidence To Start A Discrimination Case
- How Can I Prove That I Was Terminated Based on Race Discrimination?
Does Title VII Only Protect Minority Employees?
No. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not mention or favor any particular race. It simply prohibits discrimination because of race. That means it protects Black employees. It protects Hispanic employees. It protects Asian, Native American, and yes—white employees too.
In Miller, the Court reaffirmed that a white employee can absolutely bring a race discrimination claim if she is treated unfairly because of her race. The jury in her case found that is exactly what happened, and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision.
Best Reverse Discrimination Law Firm Blogs on Point:
- Top Race Discrimination Lawyer Response: What Is Reverse Discrimination?
- Reverse Age or Disability Employment Discrimination? No Such Thing.
- National Origin Discrimination Claims Can Be Based On Reverse Discrimination
Who Decides What Evidence To Believe In A Discrimination Case?
The jury does. Always.
When a case goes to trial, the jury is the one that gets to evaluate credibility, weigh conflicting stories, and decide what actually happened. In Miller, the employer argued that Miller gave weak interview answers. Miller argued that was a cover for race-based bias. The most dramatic dispute centered around what Martin, a SMART supervisor, said to Gerald Burns. In her first deposition, Burns denied hearing anything inappropriate. But two years later, in a trial deposition, he reversed course and testified that Martin said a “white girl … would never get a position under her watch” and “I would never hire a white person under my watch.”
SMART claimed this testimony was unreliable and that Burns changed his story for personal reasons, including fear of losing his job before retirement. They also alleged gamesmanship in the timing of the disclosure. But the district court allowed Burns to testify and the jury had the opportunity to watch him explain his change of heart, including his admission that he previously lied under oath. Martin denied making the comments, creating a stark credibility conflict.
Imagine sitting in the jury box, hearing a witness admit he lied under oath—and then point to the hiring manager and say she told him no white person would ever be promoted. That moment likely changed the trial.
The jury saw and heard it all. They weighed the conflicting stories. And they believed Miller. The Court held that this was not just permissible—it was the jury’s job.
Quoting Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing, the Court reminded everyone: “we may not make credibility determinations or weigh the evidence.” All inferences go to the employee, and the jury has the final say.
Best Employment Trial Lawyer Blogs on Point:
- Judges Can Cut The Jury’s Award If They Chose
- What Happens After The Jury Verdict?
- Can My Wrongful Termination Case Be Dismissed Before It Gets To A Jury?
What Lawyer Should I Call For A Race Discrimination Case?
If you are searching “best attorney for race discrimination near me,” you are not alone. And there is a reason so many employees call Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm.
We are one of the largest firms in the country dedicated solely to fighting for employees’ rights. That means we have the resources to battle the biggest employers—and win. We offer a free initial consultation and a no-fee guarantee. You do not pay unless we win. Our lawyers have decades of combined trial experience and a long track record of great results. Most importantly, we care.
Call Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm today. Whether you are still on the job or already wrongfully fired, we can help you hold your employer accountable and protect your future.
Employment Lawyer Disclaimer
This race discrimination blog provides general information about employment law, discrimination, and wrongful termination and should not be considered legal advice. Every case is different, and employees facing these issues should consult with a qualified employment lawyer to understand their specific rights and options. No promises are being made about the outcome of any case. This blog is a legal advertisement. If you are an employee dealing with employment discrimination or have been wrongfully fired, speak with an experienced attorney to protect your rights. Reading this employment law blog does not create an attorney-client relationship.