Judge slams Biden’s biased DEI business program
In a Landmark Ruling, Judge Declares Biden Administration’s Minority Business Development Agency Unconstitutional
In a huge victory against the racist diversity, equity, and inclusion agenda, a federal judge has ruled that the Biden administration’s Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) has long violated the Constitution’s equal protection guarantees by punishing “disfavored” groups — in this case, white small business owners.
In his groundbreaking ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Mark Pittman for the Northern District of Texas likened the agency’s use of race-based criteria in awarding taxpayer-funded assistance to the discriminatory actions of 19th-century American businesses that hung “Irish Need Not Apply” signs or “Blacks Need Not Apply” placards during the Jim Crow era.
“While the Agency’s work may help alleviate opportunity gaps faced by MBEs [minority business enterprises], two wrongs do not make a right. And the MBDA’s racial presumption is a wrong.”
— U.S. District Court Judge Mark Pittman
Pittman granted summary judgment for two of the three plaintiffs and issued a permanent injunction barring the federal government from using the agency to award benefits based on race.
Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of Entrepreneurs
The lawsuit was filed last year by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty on behalf of three entrepreneurs from Florida, Texas, and Wisconsin who sought assistance from the Minority Business Development Agency.
- Jeffrey Nuziard, Ph.D., is a veteran, researcher, and CEO of Sexual Wellness Centers of America in Texas, according to the lawsuit.
- Christian Bruckner, “a disabled immigrant who fled Communist Romania in the 1970s to seek a better life in America,” operates a federal contracting business.
- Matthew Piper, who “grew up in extreme poverty in Colorado,” owns an architectural firm in Wisconsin.
“Plaintiffs hail from different states and have different circumstances, backgrounds, and businesses. But they have much in common: they all worked hard to get where they are, they all overcame obstacles in pursuit of the American Dream, they all care deeply for their businesses, and they all wanted — but couldn’t obtain — assistance from the same federal program,” court documents state.
They’re also white, and didn’t fit the race-based preferences of the federal agency.
The MBDA’s vision statement, the ruling asserts, resonated with the entrepreneurs. It aims to help deliver “economic prosperity for all American business enterprises.” Created more than a half-century ago and made permanent through the $1 trillion infrastructure legislation of 2021, MBDA’s vision came with a catch. It doesn’t serve all American business enterprises, it serves “all American minority business enterprises.” As the complaint notes, MBDA uses a list of preferred races and ethnicities in handing out benefits. Anyone who doesn’t fit into those groups, whether whites or others, is considered not “socially or economically disadvantaged” and is ineligible for benefits, the lawsuit argued.
In defending the agency, the Department of Justice argued that any “member of a group not presumed socially or economically disadvantaged may petition for a presumption of disadvantage, regardless of race,” CNN reported.
“And while the application process may vary for individuals not included in the MBDA presumptions, there is a pathway for them to access the services of the MBDA Business Centers through an assertion of individual social or economic disadvantage,” the DOJ argued.
The lawsuit charged that the agency’s discriminatory acts were similar to race-based affirmative action in college admissions, which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down last year.
Rick Esenberg, president and general counsel of the Milwaukee-based Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, said the federal government created a discriminatory agency that persisted for decades, and the Biden administration reinvigorated it. The agency, Esenberg said, refused to help millions of businesses based on race.
“Those days are now over,” the attorney said. “Equality must be the law of the land, and through the bravery and persistence of our clients, we are closer to fulfilling that dream.”
In his ruling, Pittman, nominated to the bench by President Donald Trump, noted that what became the modern Minority Business Development Agency was launched on the day of his order 55 years ago by then-President Richard Nixon.
“To the extent the MBDA offers services pursuant to an unconstitutional presumption, that’s fifty-five years too many. Today the clock runs out,” the judge wrote. “Yesterday is not ours to recover, but tomorrow is ours to win or lose.”
rnrn
How did the judge in this case compare the actions of the Minority Business Development Agency to the discriminatory practices of American businesses during the Jim Crow era?
Reading the article would come to understand that a federal judge has declared the Biden administration’s Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) unconstitutional. The judge ruled that the agency’s use of race-based criteria in awarding taxpayer-funded assistance violated the Constitution’s equal protection guarantees.
U.S. District Court Judge Mark Pittman, in his groundbreaking ruling, likened the agency’s actions to the discriminatory actions of American businesses during the Jim Crow era. He stated that the agency’s racial presumption is wrong, even though its work may help alleviate opportunity gaps faced by minority business enterprises (MBEs).
The judge granted summary judgment for two of the three plaintiffs and issued a permanent injunction barring the federal government from using the agency to award benefits based on race.
The lawsuit was filed by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty on behalf of three entrepreneurs from Florida, Texas, and Wisconsin. The plaintiffs sought assistance from the MBDA but were denied because they did not fit the race-based preferences of the agency.
The plaintiffs, despite their different circumstances and backgrounds, share a common goal of pursuing the American Dream through their businesses. They all worked hard to overcome obstacles but were unable to obtain assistance from the same federal program due to their race.
The ruling highlights the MBDA’s vision statement, which aims to deliver economic prosperity for all American business enterprises. However, it restricts its services to minority business enterprises. The complaint notes that the agency uses a list of preferred races and ethnicities in handing out benefits.
The ruling is seen as a victory against the racist diversity, equity, and inclusion agenda. It reinforces the importance of equal protection guarantees and the rejection of discrimination based on race.
This landmark ruling has implications for the way government agencies and programs can allocate benefits and assistance. It challenges the use of race-based criteria and calls for a more inclusive approach to supporting all American business enterprises, regardless of race or ethnicity.
Overall, this ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding equal protection guarantees and promoting a fair and inclusive society that provides opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their background or race.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...