Brown, Adams Lead Letter to USDA Denouncing Trump Admin Attack on Well-Being of Black and Minority Farmers

Washington, DC – Congresswoman Shontel Brown (OH-11), Vice Ranking Member of the House Committee on Agriculture, and Congresswoman Alma Adams (NC-12), senior member of the House Committee on Agriculture led a letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) denouncing the Trump Administration’s decision to end USDA programing to support socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. Brown, Adams, and the letters other signees demanded documentation and justification from the USDA on this drastic move. 

In July, the USDA published a final rule eliminating the Department’s use of the “socially disadvantaged” designation—an important mechanism for reaching communities long excluded from federal agricultural benefits. This rule effectively ends the Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers Program (also known as the 2501 Program) and other USDA efforts to ensure fairness for socially disadvantaged farmers, including: African Americans, American Indians or Alaskan natives, Hispanics, and Asians or Pacific Islanders.

“For decades, Black, Latino, Indigenous, Asian American, and other historically underserved farmers have faced systemic discrimination from the Department of Agriculture,” Brown and Adams write. “This rule abandons past, present, and future attempts to address the well-documented and recognized inequities in federal agricultural policy and program administration, particularly pertaining to race and farmers of color.” 

Brown and Adams also point out that over 43,000 farmers and ranchers have claimed discrimination by the USDA, underscoring that disparities in access to USDA services remain prevalent.

The lawmakers write: “This rule is an attempt to undo hard-won progress and falsely assumes that race- and gender-based discrimination has been resolved for good.”

Brown, Adams, and the letters co-signers have demanded answers from the USDA on how this decision was reached, what data was used, and how the USDA plans to address discrimination in the future. 

In addition to Brown and Adams, the letter was co-signed by the following members: Rep. Joyce Beatty, Rep. Wesley Bell, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, Rep. Steve Cohen, Rep. Joe Courtney, Rep. Angie Craig, Rep. Cleo Fields, Rep. Shomari Figures, Rep. Jahana; Hayes, Rep. Steven Horsford, Rep. Jonathan Jackson, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, Rep. Robin Kelly, Rep. Greg Landsman, Rep. April McClain Delaney, Rep. Jennifer McClellan, Rep. LaMonica McIver, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Rep. Andrea Salinas, Rep. David Scott, Rep. Bobby Scott, Rep. Terri Sewell, Rep. Lateefah Simon, Rep. Melanie Stansbury, Rep. Emilia Sykes, Rep. Shri Thanedar, Rep. Bennie Thompson, Rep. Jill Tokuda, Rep. Eugene Vindman, Rep. Nikema Williams, and Rep. Frederica Wilson.

The text of the letter (online here) is as follows:

Dear Secretary Rollins,

We are writing to express our deep concern about the final rule published on July 10, 2025, titled “Removal of Unconstitutional Preferences Based on Race and Sex in Response to Court Ruling”. This rule abandons past, present, and future attempts to address the well-documented and recognized inequities in federal agricultural policy and program administration, particularly pertaining to race and farmers of color.

For decades, Black, Latino, Indigenous, Asian American, and other historically underserved farmers have faced systemic discrimination from the Department of Agriculture. This has been acknowledged through non-partisan investigations, court cases, and testimony from the lived experiences of countless farmers and ranchers. USDA’s past acknowledgments of this history include standing up a definition and creating designated programming for “socially disadvantaged” (SDA) farmers and ranchers and attempts at targeted outreach and support have been critical steps toward rebuilding trust. With over 43,000 farmers and ranchers claiming discrimination by USDA employees, according to an August 2024 USDA press release, the most recent Discrimination Financial Assistance Program further demonstrates that discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, and gender is far from resolved at the Department. This rule is an attempt to undo this progress and falsely assumes that race and gender-based discrimination has been solved for good. This rule does nothing to Make Agriculture Great Again, in fact, this rule ensures that small scale American farmers and ranchers will be worse off under the implementation of future USDA programs.

Given this Administration’s dedication to ensuring the success of small family farms, as claimed by the May 19, 2025, USDA “Farmers First: Small Family Farms Policy Agenda”, it is especially troubling that this rule removes all race- and sex-conscious elements from USDA program design and delivery. USDA’s ERS has reported that 33 percent of SDA producers earn positive farm income, compared to nearly 45 percent of non-SDA farmers, clearly demonstrating that in order for these operations to survive and carry on the small farm legacy, they need additional support.^[1] The removal of the “socially disadvantaged” farmer and rancher designation, without any plan to continue the work of past administrations to address structural disparities, risks further entrenching inequality in program access and outcomes.

Given this, we respectfully request your response to the following questions:

 

1. What data did USDA review to evaluate the impact this rule will have on farmers covered under the definition of “socially disadvantaged”? Please provide any assessments and analyses done prior to the final rule’s publication. 
   
    
2. How does your administration plan to ensure that there will not be discrimination or disparities in USDA programs, including:  accessing loans, conservation support, credit, and other benefits, and what mechanisms will be put in place to ensure any complaints of bias in access to programs are investigated and properly handled?
   
    
3. Prior to the publishing of the final rule, did USDA conduct any outreach to stakeholders from impacted communities, including organizations representing Black farmers, Hispanic farmers, Indigenous producers, and women farmers?
   
    
4. The rule states that “USDA, going forward, lacks a compelling interest in redressing instances of historical discrimination because of the progress achieved through USDA's extensive settlement processes and structural reforms.” How did USDA come to this finding?  Please provide the entire administrative record for this finding, including all information, analysis, documentation, and other support used to make this finding.  

At a time when the farm economy continues to be impacted by uncertainty, consolidation, and extreme weather events, we cannot afford to let any farmers, ranchers, or foresters become casualties. USDA cannot ignore history and must ensure fair and equitable access to programming for all farmers. 

[Signatures]

###