Texas Judge Ruling Determines The USDA Discriminated Against White Male Farmers — Halts Minority Aid Amid Legal Battle

A federal court has temporarily blocked specific USDA rules designed to provide disaster relief to minority and women farmers. This decision follows a lawsuit filed by a group of white male farmers.

On June 7, Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk issued a preliminary injunction, asserting that the farmers would likely succeed in their Fifth Amendment equal protection claim against the USDA. The injunction halts the USDA from making or increasing payments based on "socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher" designations under the 2022 emergency relief program. The USDA can still apply progressive factoring on future relief applications without considering race or sex.

This ruling is part of a series of decisions by Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, challenging the Biden administration's policies on various fronts, including immigration, abortion, and LGBTQ rights.

Don't Miss:

• ​​Warren Buffett once said, "If you don't find a way to make money while you sleep, you will work until you die." This high-yield real estate fund, offering an 8% yield, makes earning passive income easier than ever. 
• If there was a new fund backed by Jeff Bezos offering a 7-9% target yield with monthly dividends would you invest in it?

The USDA's relief program aims to assist farmers affected by crop and livestock disasters and Covid-19-related income losses. It also offers additional aid to those identifying as socially disadvantaged, such as American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Blacks, African Americans, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, or women.

The court's decision represents a setback for diversity initiatives in federal aid programs. In a related March ruling, a Texas federal judge found that the U.S. Commerce Department's Minority Business Development Agency violated the Constitution by discriminating against White business owners.

Historically, minority farmers have faced discrimination in USDA lending programs, leading to high foreclosure rates among Black and other minority-owned farms. The USDA has set aside $2.2 billion for compensation under Section 22007 of the Inflation Reduction Act to address these disparities.

Despite these efforts, the recent ruling highlights ongoing legal and social tensions around affirmative action and equity in federal aid programs. The plaintiffs claim that without the injunction, they would suffer irreparable harm from ongoing stigma and economic loss. This case reflects broader national debates over rectifying historical injustices and ensuring equal treatment under the law.

Trending: The average American couple has saved this much money for retirement — How do you compare?

The ruling highlights the complex balance between remedying historical discrimination and maintaining equal treatment under the law. By temporarily halting the USDA's targeted relief efforts, the decision raises questions about the methods and criteria used in government aid programs. Critics argue that such programs are essential for addressing long-standing inequities faced by minority and women farmers, historically marginalized in agricultural lending and support systems.

Supporters of the court's decision, however, contend that aid should be distributed based on need rather than demographic characteristics, ensuring that all farmers in distress receive fair treatment. This legal battle could set precedents for how affirmative action policies are implemented in federal programs, influencing future legislative and administrative approaches to diversity and equity.

This case may impact the broader discourse on affirmative action in the United States, reflecting tensions between efforts to promote diversity and the principles of equal protection. The outcome could influence other sectors beyond agriculture, potentially affecting policies in education, employment, and beyond.

Keep Reading:

• The average millionaire has 7 sources of income. Here are 3 passive income opportunities you can add today.
• This Jeff Bezos-backed startup will allow you to become a landlord in just 10 minutes, and you only need $100.