From xxxxxx <[email protected]>
Subject USDA Ends Key Support for Black Farmers Amid Trump Anti-DEI Orders
Date July 24, 2025 6:55 AM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
[[link removed]]

USDA ENDS KEY SUPPORT FOR BLACK FARMERS AMID TRUMP ANTI-DEI ORDERS  
[[link removed]]


 

Aallyah Wright
July 17, 2025
Capital B
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ The agency will no longer use the term “socially
disadvantaged,” saying it has sufficiently addressed historic
discrimination. _

The U.S. Department of Agriculture will no longer use the term
“socially disadvantaged,” which described farmers or ranchers who
had been subjected to racial, ethnic, or gender discrimination.,
(Aallyah Wright/Capital B)

 

Lloyd Wright isn’t shocked that the United States Department of
Agriculture is reversing a 35-year-old policy meant to help Black
farmers in favor of a race-neutral approach.

But the 84-year-old, who grows soybeans and vegetables in Virginia,
knows his fellow Black farmers will feel “the damage” of it. 

Last week, the agency announced that it’s eliminating the term
“socially disadvantaged,” which describes farmers or ranchers who
had been subjected to racial, ethnic, or gender discrimination, which
includes Black, Hispanic, Native American, and Asian groups. 

“[The government] is going to take back the money — the little bit
we were getting — and some of the outreach money will be crawled
back,” Wright said. “Because they’re eliminating socially
disadvantaged and anything else dealing with DEI [diversity, equity
and inclusion].” 

The department adopted the language in the 1990 Farm Bill
[[link removed].] to
deliver resources to minority farmers, including through the 2501
Program — an initiative that requires the USDA to produce outreach
and technical assistance to historically underserved farmers to ensure
that they have access to grants and other resources. 

Now, the agency will drop the use of the term entirely and will no
longer consider race or sex-based criteria in its decision-making
process for programs. According to the decision
[[link removed]],
this move will ensure that USDA programs “uphold the principles of
meritocracy, fairness, and equal opportunity for all
participants.” 

The decision also said the department has “sufficiently” addressed
its history of discrimination through litigation that has resulted in
settlements, relief, and reforms.

USDA officials did not respond to a question about the potential
impact this policy will have on programs or on farmers of color, who
represent about 4% of the nation’s 3.3 million producers, according
to the Census of Agriculture
[[link removed]].

However, a spokesperson for the agency said in a statement that USDA
Secretary Brooke Rollins will follow the law while putting farmers
first.

“Under President Trump, USDA does not discriminate and single out
individual farmers based on race, sex, or political orientation.
Secretary Rollins is working to reorient the department to be more
effective at serving the American people and put farmers first while
following the law,” the statement said.

Several Democratic congressional leaders are speaking out against the
change and demanding the USDA be held accountable.

U.S. Rep. Shontel Brown, a Democrat from Ohio who is a vice ranking
member on the House Committee on Agriculture, said this is
“[President Donald] Trump’s resegregation agenda.” Brown said
the rule isn’t about fairness, but stripping the tools to help level
the playing field.

“It’s no secret that the Department has a long history of locking
out and leaving behind Black, Brown, and Indigenous farmers,”
Brown wrote
[[link removed]] in
a statement. “Now, this administration is taking a deliberate and
disgraceful step backward on the path to attempt to right the historic
wrongs. The ‘socially disadvantaged’ designation was a long
overdue recognition of the barriers to land, credit, and opportunity
that farmers of color have faced for generations.”

U.S. Rep. Shomari Figures, a Democrat from Alabama who also serves on
the House Committee on Agriculture, said that instead of reversing
this rule, the administration should compensate Black farmers impacted
by the USDA’s past actions.

“It’s no secret that Black farmers were economically disadvantaged
by the past intentional discrimination by USDA,” Figures said in a
statement to Capital B. “I believe this administration should take
every opportunity to … implement criteria that ensure that Black
farmers are not subjected to such treatment in the future.”

A field of wind turbines stand in Tunica County, Mississippi. The new
USDA policy regarding the term “socially disadvantaged” comes in
response to executive orders issued earlier this year by President
Donald Trump, which terminates any mandates or programs that support
DEI. (Aallyah Wright/Capital B)

For Wright, a retired USDA employee who has worked with 10 presidents
dating back to the 1960s, the label “socially disadvantaged” was
never a good one because it included too many groups of people. He
said Black people haven’t benefited from the wording as much as
other people. 

Wright said while he doesn’t believe preferential treatment should
be given to a person because of race or sex, the government
shouldn’t deny a person resources for the same reason.

“I don’t think I’m socially disadvantaged. I just happen to be
Black, and they discriminated against me because I’m Black, and so I
think it’s time that we straighten it out,” he said. 

“There are people who deserve compensation — I wouldn’t call it
reparations — but they deserve to be compensated for the damages
done to them in the past” by state, local and federal governments,
he added. 

Tiffany Bellfield El-Amin, founder of the Kentucky Black Farmers
Association, agrees that there needs to be a new definition, because
not all Black people fit into the category of being disadvantaged.
However, redefining the language of the policy is crucial to ensure
that Black farmers, who often receive limited resources, are
adequately supported, she said. 

She pointed out that some Black farmers with larger operations have
been able to secure loans, even though they do not face disadvantages
or discrimination. Additionally, she said that in some county offices,
USDA officials prioritize outreach to white farmers — specifically
those they are familiar with — leaving many Black farmers to
navigate the system on their own.

The most prominent concern for Bellfield El-Amin was the loss of
inclusivity.

“That’s why we adopt new ways of doing Underground Railroad-type
situations. We’re gonna figure it out one way or another,” she
told Capital B. “We just don’t have time to fight with definitions
that may or may not help us in the long run, just exhaust us even
further … and we still end up here."

The new policy comes in response to two executive orders issued
earlier this year by Trump, which terminates any mandates or programs
that support DEI. 

“We are taking this aggressive, unprecedented action to eliminate
discrimination in any form at USDA,” Brooke Rollins, secretary of
agriculture, said in a news release
[[link removed]].
“It is simply wrong and contrary to the fundamental principle that
all persons should be treated equally.”

There’s also been ongoing pressure from white farmers who have
demanded the administration address what they describe as reverse
discrimination.

Just last month, a conservative law firm sued
[[link removed]] the
Trump administration on behalf of Adam Faust, a white dairy farmer
from Wisconsin. Faust alleges that he has experienced discrimination
in three USDA programs
[[link removed]] —
Dairy Margin Coverage Program, Loan Guarantee Program, and
Environmental Quality Incentives Program. He claims the programs favor
women and farmers of color, offering reduced administrative fees,
higher loan guarantees, and more money for conservation efforts.

In 2021, the farmer successfully sued former President Joe Biden’s
administration over similar claims. Faust, along with a group of white
Midwestern farmers, argued
[[link removed]] that
a $4 billion loan forgiveness program that would have helped farmers
of color was unconstitutional because it discriminated against them.
This suit was filed by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty,
the same firm representing him in the current case.

Meanwhile, Black farmers are still suing for their due. 

Earlier this year, the Memphis, Tennessee-based Black Farmers and
Agriculturalists Association brought a case
[[link removed]] to
the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, alleging they were ineligible
to apply for the Discrimination Financial Assistance Program. The
program provided assistance to 43,000 farmers — of all racial
backgrounds — who experienced discrimination prior to 2021.

U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat from Georgia who serves on the
Senate Agriculture Committee, told Capital B that he pledges his
support to help Black farmers receive equitable resources.

“Instead of working to create more certainty for our nation’s
farmers and adopting a stable trade agenda, this administration is
focused on divisive publicity stunts that will hurt our agriculture
industry long-term,” Warnock said. 

Given the current political climate, Wright isn’t sure if he should
see the glass as half empty or half full, but he remains pessimistic
of this administration. However, he says this is an opportunity to get
some things straightened out and implement a new definition.

“In some cases, they started to broaden the social disadvantage to
include the historically underserved, and if you add it up, it was
about 80% of the population,” Wright said. 

He added: “We’re going to have plenty of time to work on [a new
definition]. You’re not going to be able to get anything passed we
get a different Congress and president, and you’re really talking
about the next administration at best. By then, we ought to be able to
straighten it out.”

_Aallyah Wright is Capital B's rural issues reporter. Twitter
@aallyahpatrice_

_CAPITAL B IS A NONPROFIT NEWS ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO DELIVERING
BLACK-FOCUSED, INDEPENDENT, FACT-BASED JOURNALISM THAT INFORMS,
INSPIRES, AND EMPOWERS OUR COMMUNITY. We work hard to bring you the
stories that often go untold—stories that matter._

_We believe in keeping our journalism accessible and free for
everyone, and as a nonprofit, YOUR TAX-DEDUCTIBLE CONTRIBUTION MAKES
ALL THE DIFFERENCE. GIVE TODAY.
[[link removed]]_

 

* Black Farmers
[[link removed]]
* USDA
[[link removed]]
* anti-DEI campaign
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis

  • Sender: Portside
  • Political Party: n/a
  • Country: United States
  • State/Locality: n/a
  • Office: n/a
  • Email Providers:
    • govDelivery