Jillian Ambrose

Counsel | She/Her/Hers

Overview

Jillian provides pragmatic advice and strategic support to employers navigating challenges big and small. Whether supporting clients in grappling with emerging issues like the evolving DEI landscape, investigating high-profile harassment allegations, or defending complex claims in federal court, Jillian brings a collaborate and practical approach to challenging situations.

Jillian is a trusted advisor to clients on all aspects of employment law, including compliance with state and federal anti-discrimination laws, leave issues, wage and hour law compliance, and accommodation requests. She creates and conducts engaging and impactful anti-harassment trainings and supports Human Resources and Employee Relations professionals in developing robust internal investigations practices. She brings a holistic approach to misconduct investigations, recognizing the importance of precision, as well as compassion, in addressing sensitive allegations and developing actionable recommendations. Jillian also guides clients through pay equity analyses and audits, and she counsels on the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in making employment decisions. Jillian’s core clients include federal contractors, nonprofit associations, Fortune 50 corporations, and educational institutions, including private K-12 schools as well as colleges and universities.  For several clients in the education space, Jillian has conducted deeply sensitive investigations into misconduct allegations; litigated discrimination and Equal Pay Act claims implicating tenure systems; and counseled on accommodations for both students and employees.  

Jillian has a proven track record, in state and federal courts, of winning dismissal of claims of race, sex, disability, and age discrimination; wrongful termination; and wage and hour violations.

Prior to joining the firm, Jillian served as a law clerk to Judge Anthony Epstein and then to Judge Steven M. Wellner, both of the D.C. Superior Court. Before law school, Jillian was an analyst in the human capital practice of an international consulting firm, where she provided management consulting services to a portfolio of federal agency clients.

Jillian graduated from the University of Michigan Law School, where she was the administrative manager of the Michigan Journal of Gender and Law and the president of the Women Law Students Association. She holds a bachelor's degree in government from Smith College.

Career & Education

    • Smith College, B.A., cum laude, government, 2007
    • University of Michigan Law School, J.D., cum laude, 2013
    • Smith College, B.A., cum laude, government, 2007
    • University of Michigan Law School, J.D., cum laude, 2013
    • District of Columbia
    • Maryland
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
    • District of Columbia
    • Maryland
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Jillian's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Sixth Circuit’s “Background Circumstances” Requirement For “Reverse Discrimination” Cases

On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the "background circumstances" rule that would require majority-group plaintiffs to meet a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII discrimination cases. The decision vacated and remanded the case for further consideration by the Sixth Circuit. In so doing, the Court held that all plaintiffs – whether minority or majority employees – bringing discrimination cases under Title VII are subject to the same evidentiary standards under the McDonnell Douglas framework for evaluating disparate-treatment claims....

Jillian's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Sixth Circuit’s “Background Circumstances” Requirement For “Reverse Discrimination” Cases

On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the "background circumstances" rule that would require majority-group plaintiffs to meet a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII discrimination cases. The decision vacated and remanded the case for further consideration by the Sixth Circuit. In so doing, the Court held that all plaintiffs – whether minority or majority employees – bringing discrimination cases under Title VII are subject to the same evidentiary standards under the McDonnell Douglas framework for evaluating disparate-treatment claims....