USDA Scraps Discriminatory Farming Policies That Excluded White Male Farmers

The United States Department of Agriculture just settled a lawsuit that puts an end to race-based discrimination in federal farming programs. And honestly, it’s about time someone said the quiet part out loud: when you start handing out benefits based on skin color instead of need or merit, you’re not fixing discrimination. You’re just picking new targets.

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty secured this settlement after challenging what they rightfully called discriminatory practices across three major federal programs. The USDA will even cover their attorney fees, which tells you something about how defensible these policies really were. Dan Lennington, the group’s managing vice president and deputy counsel, didn’t mince words. He called them “shameful” programs that the Trump Administration inherited from their predecessors. That’s the kind of blunt assessment we need more of in public discourse.

Here’s what actually happened. Last June, WILL filed suit over the USDA’s use of race and sex as eligibility criteria for programs including the Loan Guarantee Program, the Dairy Margin Coverage Fee, and the EQIP Grant Program. They argued these policies violated equal protection guarantees in the Constitution. Not some abstract legal theory or partisan talking point. The Constitution itself.

They represented Adam Faust, a dairy farmer from Chilton, Wisconsin. Just a guy trying to make a living in one of America’s toughest industries. Faust is one of roughly two million white male farmers who make up about 60 percent of all American farmers. These men were explicitly excluded from benefits under Biden-era policies purely because of their race and sex. Let that sink in for a moment.

The irony is thick enough to cut with a knife. We spent decades dismantling legal structures that treated people differently based on immutable characteristics. The civil rights movement wasn’t fought so we could eventually reverse the arrow and call it progress. Equal protection means equal protection. It doesn’t mean “equal except when we decide otherwise” or “equal unless you’re the wrong demographic this decade.”

Farming isn’t some cushy office job where you can afford to play identity politics with people’s livelihoods. It’s brutal work with razor-thin margins. Weather, disease, market fluctuations, equipment costs that would make your eyes water. These farmers need support based on actual need, not because some bureaucrat in Washington decided their melanin levels or chromosomes make them more deserving.

The Biden administration’s approach represented everything wrong with modern progressive governance. They looked at legitimate concerns about historical discrimination and decided the solution was more discrimination, just pointed in a different direction. That’s not justice. That’s revenge dressed up in the language of equity, and it violates the most basic principles this country was built on.

You know what’s really striking? How quickly the USDA settled once someone actually challenged these programs in court. They knew they couldn’t defend this in front of a judge who cared about the Constitution more than political fashion. The legal ground was quicksand from day one.

This settlement matters beyond farming. It sends a signal that race-based government programs won’t survive constitutional scrutiny, no matter how noble their stated intentions. The law doesn’t care about your feelings or your theory of historical justice. It cares about treating citizens equally under consistent rules.

American agriculture deserves better than programs that divide farmers by race. It deserves policies that help people who actually need help, regardless of what they look like. That’s not controversial. That’s common sense wrapped in constitutional principle.

Related: Trump Reads Scripture as Nation Prepares for 250th Birthday Prayer Revival