Third Way: An Injunction Against USDA Black American Reparations

track5

The last couple of years have shown a massive increase in attempted reparations towards Black Americans.  This movement is backed by several different groups, anywhere from certain corporations to some sectors of the Catholic Church, as well as some states and the federal government. As stated by the President of the NAACP, Derrick Johnson, reparations are needed for Black Americans “to be made whole.” When Biden was running as a candidate for president, he stated that he supported a commission on reparations and racial equity. While this commission has not been created yet, he has still made several strides towards reparations for Black Americans.

The latest of these reparations was included in the American Rescue Plan relief package, a bill that was created to address the lasting impacts of COVID-19. Several sections of this bill were targeted towards minority and socially disadvantaged farmers and minority-owned businesses were impacted more by COVID-19 than White businesses. The bill “provides funding for the USDA to address historical discrimination and disparities in the agriculture sector”, as well as granting loan forgiveness and financial assistance to minority and socially disadvantaged farmers. The program is supposed to cover up to 120% of the debts of minority farmers who belong to a race or ethnicity that has historically been discriminated against in America. 

USDA Historical Racial Discrimination

This program is especially important given the history of the US Department of Agriculture and its treatment of minority farmers. In 1965, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) found that the USDA discriminated against Black farmers when giving loans. Despite USCCR’s discovery, this loan discrimination went on for years. Again in 1981, a report was released by the USDA – the very organization that was causing this discrimination – that stated that minority farms have less access necessary to credit and loans. Throughout the 80s and 90s, similar reports are filed against the USDA showing that they demonstrate discrimination against minority farmers when providing loans and financial assistance. 

In the early 2000s, there were several instances of a massive gap in the subsidy amounts given to Black and White farmers: Black farmers were given $38 million in 2007 while their White counterparts were given $10.6 billion. Even further, more than 14,000 cases citing racial discrimination by the USDA were dismissed. Given this documented history of the systemic discrimination that minority farmers have faced at the hands of the USDA, it should come as no surprise that when the USDA provided financial assistance to the tune of billions of dollars to farmers impacted by COVID-19, only 1% of the aid was received by minority farmers. With this history, it is imperative that reparations, the money they are owed by the USDA, are given to these minority farmers as laid out in the American Rescue Plan.  

The Supposed Unconstitutionality of the Program

However, not everyone views this section of the bill as fundamentally good and helpful. Instead, judges in several different states are now blocking this section of the bill from being enacted. In Florida, federal Judge Marica Morales Howard stated that this violated White farmers’ rights to equal protection granted by the 14th Amendment. This is not the first time the 14th amendment has been used against people of color in discrimination cases. A similar case was presented in Wisconsin where U.S. District Court Judge William C. Griesbach ruled that this program discriminated on the basis of race and was thus unconstitutional. While both of these judges’ arguments feel familiar, they are typically used in cases of minority discrimination. It is ironic that White farmers – who, by default of their race, cannot experience systemic discrimination – would now claim them in their defense as well. 

These court rulings come after a dozen of White farmers sued the USDA over the loan forgiveness program. Because White farmers were ineligible to apply for the loans, which they say they also need after COVID-19, they claim that they have been discriminated against based on their race. However, these farmers were all eligible for the billions of dollars that the USDA distributed last year, of which minority farmers received only 1%. They were also able to receive millions more in subsidies, loans, and credit over the last couple of decades. A Tufts University analysis in 2018 found that the constant systemic discrimination of the USDA resulted in $120 billion of lost minority farmland value, which makes the mere $4 billion that this program would give to minority farmers seem almost inconsequential in comparison.

While it is true that this program does specifically target farmers based solely on their race, it is hard to argue that this program is all wrong and discriminatory. White farmers have been receiving aid for a century now that minority farmers were not given access to, and these same White farmers did not complain last year when they received a far greater amount of COVID-19 aid than their minority counterparts. These court cases demonstrate the double standard that is held by courts when it comes to racial discrimination and inequalities among US farmers.   

Going Forward 

Due to the federal judges’ decisions in Wisconsin and Florida, this relief program is now on hold. This means that neither White nor minority farmers are receiving financial assistance currently, which has created a lose-lose situation on the part of the White farmers. Fortunately, it appears as if the USDA is going to defend their program and are ready to distribute the loan forgiveness payments as soon as the injunction is lifted. Unfortunately, it cannot happen until the Wisconsin District Court rules more broadly on the case and, so far, it appears as if its ruling will state that the program is indeed unconstitutional as it discriminates on the basis of race. Again, this argument raises the question of whether it is indeed even possible to racially discriminate against White people, as the entire system is built to benefit them. 

There is hope still that this program will be allowed to continue, as it would provide much-needed benefits to minority farmers and would work to combat some of the discrimination that they have faced over the decades. However, this program is still not the end-all-be-all. After this program is implemented, the USDA needs to continue to take steps to provide reparations and aids to the farmers that it has discriminated against for a century and reevaluate the ways that they provide loans and financial assistance to needy farmers.