As part of its pandemic relief program, the Biden team came up with a plan to relieve the federal loans of farmers. Except it was only for non-white farmers.
You can’t do that, you say? Well, apparently the Biden folks have an issue with treating folks equally under the law.
According to the Washington Times, the plan defined “socially disadvantaged” farmers and ranchers as “Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Hispanic, or Asian, or Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.” Talk about racist, calling people “socially disadvantaged” based purely on race and then excluding anyone who was white from the relief.
In an op-ed, sixth generation farmer Leisl Carpenter, wrote, “Biden’s law is seemingly designed to racially humiliate Americans like me.”
To qualify under the bill, an applicant or his farm needn’t have experienced racial discrimination. There is not even a requirement that the applicant have suffered any direct economic loss due to the lockdowns. Skin color is the most important consideration.
Those who qualify are eligible for up to 120 percent debt relief on their farm loan through the Farm Service Agency. You might notice that 120 percent is higher than 100 percent. Yes, the bill offers a windfall to many farmers who might never have personally suffered discrimination in the course of their agricultural business or any serious financial damage from COVID-19.
But the Biden team was brought up short by one of the few branches of government showing some sense nowadays — the federal courts.
District Court Judge S. Thomas Anderson of the Western District of Tennessee granted the motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the U.S. Department of Agriculture them implementing the plan that barred white farmers and ranchers.
“The Court finds that Plaintiff has shown a substantial likelihood that he will prevail on his claim that Section 1005 violates his right to equal protection under the law,” the decision states. “Absent action by the Court, socially disadvantaged farmers will obtain debt relief, while Plaintiff will suffer the irreparable harm of being excluded from that program solely on the basis of his race.”
The judge, while expressing reservations about the legal concept of applying a nationwide injunction, said that in this case it was warranted, indicating what a severe problem he viewed existed in this case. It also indicates that the plaintiffs, the farmers discriminated against, are likely to prevail on the merits ultimately.
This is just the latest win against this racist plan.
On July 1, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in the Northern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction blocking the USDA from implementing the program, a week after U.S. District Court Judge Marcia Morales Howard in the Middle District of Florida did the same.
Those orders were more sweeping than the temporary restraining order delivered June 10 by a federal judge in Wisconsin on behalf of 12 White farmers.
This had nothing to do ultimately with pandemic relief, because it wasn’t based upon demonstrated loss but upon race, the Biden team was trying to use it to impose their ‘racial justice’ goals. So they did it by being flat-out racist. Hang equal protection under the law, they don’t need that. Racism is always wrong, even when you try to dress it up like this. But thankfully, the courts are forcefully rebuking Biden on this.
This article was originally published by RedState. Read the original article.
