DOJ says USDA “socially disadvantaged” fee waivers violate equal protection

In a June 22, 2026 legal opinion, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that a USDA “socially disadvantaged” preference—used in connection with a conservation-planning user-fee waiver—violates the Constitution’s equal-protection requirements when the challenged preference relies on race- and sex-linked criteria.

For farmers and other agricultural program applicants, the practical question is what changes next in eligibility checks, documentation, and fee-waiver administration as USDA updates how it runs these programs.

What DOJ/OLC said on June 22

DOJ says OLC found that USDA’s “socially disadvantaged” preference, as tied to a user-fee waiver for conservation-planning assistance, fails equal-protection review because the preference is linked to race and sex. In short: DOJ’s legal position is that this specific race/sex-based “socially disadvantaged” preference cannot stand as administered.

Why the “socially disadvantaged” setup is legally central

OLC’s reasoning turns on how USDA operationalizes “socially disadvantaged” status for program administration. DOJ frames the constitutional problem as occurring when the government uses a definition and preference that functionally treats applicants differently based on race and sex to trigger a benefit.

What DOJ says may still be workable

DOJ also says the OLC analysis left room for USDA to continue some “socially disadvantaged” program activity if the relevant eligibility administration is done in a race- and sex-neutral manner. That distinction matters for what USDA can keep, what it must change, and how applicants’ paperwork could be handled going forward.

What this means for farmers and fee-waiver applicants right now

This is a DOJ legal position, not a direct, instant USDA form overhaul. Still, it is a clear signal that USDA will need to ensure that eligibility decisions tied to the fee-waiver pathway are not being made through race- and sex-based criteria.

Until USDA issues follow-on operational guidance, applicants should expect some uncertainty in how “socially disadvantaged” status is verified and how conservation-planning user-fee waivers are processed. A practical step is to keep records relevant to current “socially disadvantaged” determinations you use for applications, while watching for updates to USDA program instructions and portal guidance.

How DOJ signaled this approach earlier

In an earlier February 9, 2026 letter to Congress, DOJ’s Office of the Solicitor General laid out DOJ’s position about race- and sex-based preferences in USDA programs and DOJ’s enforcement posture regarding those issues. The June 22 OLC opinion is part of that same legal thread—drawing lines around which USDA preference mechanisms cross the constitutional line.

What to watch next

For near-term impact, watch USDA for procedural follow-through: updated eligibility verification steps, revised application/fee-waiver instructions, and any changes in how USDA explains qualification for conservation-planning user-fee waivers tied to “socially disadvantaged” status. The key indicator will be whether USDA shifts administration toward race- and sex-neutral criteria.

Sources

• DOJ Office of Public Affairs press release (June 22, 2026; updated June 24, 2026): “Justice Department Concludes USDA Preferences for ‘Socially Disadvantaged’ Groups Violate the Constitution”
• Law360 coverage (June 23, 2026): DOJ says USDA’s “socially disadvantaged” waivers unlawful