Biden administration still bans white farmers from receiving federal aid

President Biden’s farm loan cancellation program is unconstitutional and discriminates against white farmers. A court case can end.

President Biden’s farm loan cancellation program is shockingly unconstitutional. It is a law that would selectively repay farmers’ loans on the basis of race. A non-white farmer would have his entire loan paid off. Her neighbor, who is white, would not be eligible for the program. It has been predictably challenged in court with predictable results.

Each court to decide the issue issued a preliminary injunction, so hardly any money got out of the door before it stopped. You might have thought it was over, but it isn’t.

After suffering an uninterrupted series of losses in the defense of the racial preferences of the program, the government has changed its tactics. He argued that it is unnecessary and unfair to force him, United States of America represented by the Ministry of Justice (the largest law firm in the world), to have to defend its unconstitutional program in several places at the same time. Remember this the next time you need a tax extension.

In large part, this change in tactics has worked. On a case-by-case basis, the courts have suspended their cases. Those national injunctions that you may have heard of? They are now pretty much moot or completely dissolved. The government avoided a much needed calculation.

A remarkable case

Under the program, which was touted as a relief from the coronavirus, non-white farmers receiving loans from the Agriculture Ministry would get their loans fully canceled, plus an additional 20% on top. It doesn’t matter if the farmer has been an actual victim of discrimination or has ever received settlement benefits for being discriminated against, or if the farm has been devastated by COVID closures. The program makes breed the most important characteristic.

In only one case in the country, a judge has rejected the government’s request for a suspension outright, that of Rob Holman, a farmer in Tennessee who is unfortunately not eligible for the program because he is white. The government has nothing to complain about being inundated with volunteer law firms and then putting Holman’s case aside for years to come while it chooses where and how it wishes to litigate. The government has secured all of her other stays, although an additional stay request is still pending in Florida. The Holman case will likely be heard this year, assuming the government’s current offer for a delay does not succeed.

Holman is represented by Southeast Legal Foundation and Mountain States Legal. Our customer tries to stand up to the most powerful government on the planet. He is a fourth generation farmer in Tennessee. Paying off his loans hasn’t always been easy, but Holman has always made those payments and kept his farm afloat. The government arbitrarily decided to cancel loans from its competitors, who are now free to make improvements to their farm equipment, which Holman cannot. This is not fair, and it is only with the help of two public interest law firms that Holman is able to try to stop him.

Evidence of systemic racism

Inequitable systemic treatmentThis is how the government justifies its racial preference for canceling agricultural loans. We have heard a lot about “systemic racism”. It supposedly permeates America’s past and infects everything today.

“Systemic racism” was battered when the government was brought to justice in June. The courts demand evidence, after all. It’s a different game than, say, Twitter or Congress. In fact, you have to prove what you are saying. The larger the claim, the more powerful the evidence expected by the courts. If America is, and always has been, racist, that should be easy enough to prove.

When the government turned over its cards, it had nothing. They offered a mountain of evidence, citing all historical wrongs dating back centuries. But the judge only admitted (minimizing things a bit) that the government’s facts “are less useful than they seem. “Indeed. The judge then shut down the program in all 50 states.

Systemic racism in 2021 has become the bogeyman of this administration. They invoke it whenever they need to shake a few trillions of dollars from the American taxpayer. Why is the government having such a hard time proving that the monster exists?

Courts are fed up with race-based government programs first justified by flimsy claims that America is systematically racist. In another recent case concerning restaurant loans – again prioritized based on skin color – the court faulty the government because it could not “identify specific incidents of past discrimination”.

When you analyze things further, the whole business of understanding who races that have been sufficiently victimized becomes quite sleazy soon enough: “Preferences for Pakistanis but not Afghans; Japanese but not Iraqis; Hispanics but not Middle Easterners. Can you imagine writing this law? It’s disgusting just to read about it. And some of us have noticed that government is not always… very good at its job. Do you really want the talent that was ignored by Veterans Affairs to be tasked with deciding which races are “socially disadvantaged”?

Let’s not allow more discrimination

Now, with all of that said, no one is saying that the Department of Agriculture has always been a beacon of equality. He does not have. But under the Pigford colonies in 1999, the US taxpayer has already paid more than $2.3 billion to right the wrongs committed by the ministry against black farmers. Now, these same people from the Department of Agriculture are asking us for a license to engage in more discrimination? Certainly not.

The solution to racism should never be more racism. Nor should we allow an agency with a troubling history of racial discrimination to become more involved in racial discrimination.

We should stop playing with this endless game of government extortion, where the government’s past racism gives it a pass for more racism. We need a different approach, spelled out in the Fourteenth Amendment and civil rights laws: equality. Stop treating people differently based on the color of their skin. That’s it.

Braden Boucek is Director of Litigation for the Southeastern Legal Foundation, a national constitutional public interest law firm founded in 1976 that has appeared regularly before the Supreme Court of the United States.

Source link

Comments are closed.