In a per curiam opinion, the Court held (pdf):

Although it is true the disputed word will not always be evidence of racial animus, it does not follow that the term, standing alone, is always benign. The speaker's meaning may depend on various factors including context, inflection, tone of voice, local custom, and historical usage. Insofar as the Court of Appeals held that modifiers or qualifications are necessary in all instances to render the disputed term probative of bias, the court's decision is erroneous.

Discrimination can also be established by showing that white employees with fewer qualifications were promoted. The Eleventh Circuit held that comparative evidence calls the company's rationale for a promotion into question only when "the disparity in qualifications is so apparent as virtually to jump off the page and slap you in the face." Colorful language, but not all that helpful, as legal standards go.

The visual image of words jumping off the page to slap you (presumably a court) in the face is unhelpful and imprecise as an elaboration of the standard for inferring pretext from superior qualifications.

The Court's decision today doesn't assure that Ash will retain his trial victory, but it sets the Eleventh Circuit on a more reasonable path (i.e., a path that is less hostile to employees) as it reviews the evidence in support of the jury's decision.