Federal judge orders minority business agency opened to all races

[former9thward]

A federal judge in Texas has ruled that a 55-year-old federal agency created to help minority-owned businesses must now open its doors to every race, siding with a group of White plaintiffs who argued that the agency discriminated against them.

In a 93-page opinion rendered Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Mark T. Pittman ruled that the Minority Business Development Agency’s presumption that businesses owned by Blacks, Latinos and other minorities are inherently disadvantaged violated the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection. He permanently enjoined the agency’s business centers, which have assisted minority-owned businesses in accessing capital and government contracts, from extending services based on an applicant’s race.

“If courts mean what they say when they ascribe supreme importance to constitutional rights, the federal government may not flagrantly violate such rights with impunity,” Pittman wrote. “The MBDA has done so for years. Time’s up.”

The ruling is the latest blow to government affirmative action programs after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in June against Harvard and the University of North Carolina that upended race-conscious college admissions. The decision sparked a broad legal offensive against affirmative action and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs in the private sector and public sectors. In July, a Tennessee judge ruled that the Small Business Administration 8(a) Business Development program’s use of the racial presumption of disadvantage was unconstitutional, forcing the agency to overhaul its program.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/03/06/minority-business-programs-racial-disadvantage-unconstitutional/

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Undoing the work of 60 years.

[Irish_Dem]

2. All the painstaking progress we have made, totally thrown out the window.

[angrychair]

3. I assume there will be appeals

This ridiculous ruling cannot stand.

[kelly1mm]

7. probably will be appeals, all the way possibly to the USSC where they can predictably drive

another nail in the coffin of affirmative action as has been their bent as of late .....

[barbaraann]

4. What about legacy preferences? What about nepotism?

Legacy preference example:

Currently, the Ivy League institutions are estimated to admit 10% to 15% of each entering class using legacy admissions.[19] For example, in the 2008 entering undergraduate class, the University of Pennsylvania admitted 41.7% of legacies who applied during the early decision admissions round and 33.9% of legacies who applied during the regular admissions cycle, versus 29.3% of all students who applied during the early decision admissions round and 16.4% of all who applied during the regular cycle.[20] In 2009, Princeton admitted 41.7% of legacy applicants—more than 4.5 times the 9.2% rate of non-legacies. Similarly, in 2006, Brown University admitted 33.5% of alumni children, significantly higher than the 13.8% overall admissions rate. In short, Ivy League and other top schools typically admit legacies at two to five times their overall admission rates.[21] Among top universities, the University of Notre Dame and Georgetown University are known to weigh legacy status heavily in their application processes.[22]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy_preferences


I probably don't even need to give an example of nepotism, but how about Jared and Ivanka?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotism

[TxGuitar]

6. Now now, those are mostly rich white people

So of course it's ok when they do it. Merca!

[barbaraann]

8. Leonard Cohen sang about that.

https://genius.com/Leonard-cohen-everybody-knows-lyrics

[Bettie]

9. Well...those benefit

white people, usually rich ones! It's their right! (Just in case someone thought I was serious)

[kelly1mm]

5. Like it or not, this ruling is following the USSC ruling in the Students for fair admissions case

decided last year.

[LeftInTX]

10. Ugh.....

This program has been so beneficial for economic development.