Democrats' racially biased rescue plan rules facing court challenge

AP Photo/Evan Vucci

When the Amerian Rescue Plan was passed, it included a provision setting aside $29 billion for farmers, restaurant owners and other businesses that were heavily impacted by the pandemic. The language of the bill raised eyebrows immediately because the grants and loan forgiveness being made available were to be prioritized for “socially disadvantaged” owners of such businesses. That provision became relevant to Adam Faust, a Wisconsin dairy farmer. Faust has two prosthetic legs but manages to operate his small farm with 70 dairy cows and a couple of hundred acres of feed crops for them. Keeping his business going during the pandemic was rough, so this program was right up his ally. Unfortunately, when he went to apply, he discovered that the available funds prioritized for the “socially disadvantaged” are going first only to applicants who are Blacks, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Hispanics and Pacific Islanders. Faust is white and would have to go to the back of the line. There’s more than a fair chance that the funds will be exhausted long before his application would be considered.

With that in mind, Faust decided to take the administration to court on the basis of racial discrimination. He joined in with multiple other business owners facing the same roadblocks. And according to some legal scholars who have evaluated the case, they’ve got a pretty good shot at winning. (New York Post)

Fortunately, the new law’s anti-white provisions are facing a challenge in court, and the challengers are likely to win. The US Constitution forbids discrimination based on race — period…

Just because blacks make up a small percentage of restaurant owners or farmers doesn’t, by itself, prove past racism or justify discriminating against another group now.

Overturning the American Rescue Plan’s racist provisions is essential, lest Democrats move ahead with more extreme measures. Next up is the Justice for Black Farmers Act, “to encourage a new generation of black farmers” at a cost of $100 billion.

Several other farmers and restaurant owners from Texas have joined in on the lawsuit for the same reasons. Will they win? If the courts are following the Constitution, they should. Faust qualifies for the program in every other way. He is being shuffled to the back of the line for one reason and one reason only, that being the color of his skin.

As noted in the excerpt above, a decision on this will be needed soon. There’s another program currently being crafted called the “Justice for Black Farmers Act” which will set aside $100 billion to grant 160 acres of land, a home mortgage, a loan for farming equipment and agricultural training to 200,000 people who want to engage in farming. The only requirement to qualify is that you have to have at least one African-American parent. You don’t even have to know anything about farming. Even if you’re Hispanic or Asian you apparently can’t apply.

Not only are the racial exclusions constitutionally problematic, but these requirements are being established based on criteria that are almost impossible to measure. Let’s say that any of us wanted to apply for some farmland under that new act. Precisely “how Black” do you have to be? Since they’re saying “at least one parent” you might think that you would need to be at least 50% Black. But how many people are absolutely 100% pure of any race at this point? The genetic research company 23 & Me assures me that I’m 4% Subsaharan African. Would I qualify? How about Rachel Dolezal? If you can “identify” as being whichever gender you like, you should be able to identify as being Black, shouldn’t you?

The Democrats are paddling around in some very murky legal waters here. These programs need to be taken back to the shop and retuned or there are going to be some very ugly legal battles in their future that may very well backfire on them entirely.