Фермерские НКО подали в суд на Министерство сельского хозяйства США из-за запрета на программы разнообразия

Why farm nonprofits are suing USDA over grant DEI Rules Published 10:00 am Thursday, August 13, 2026 Several agriculture nonprofits are challenging the Trump administration’s directives aimed at discouraging “diversity, equity and inclusion” policies among recipients of USDA grants. Three organizations on the West Coast — Washington Farmland Trust, Oregon Farm Corps and Agroecology Commons — are among the five plaintiffs in a lawsuit seeking to overturn anti-DEI conditions on USDA grants. The lawsuit claims these directives unlawfully “restrict the speech and activities in which grantees can engage, even if with non-federal dollars,” if they pertain to DEI, “gender ideology” or assistance to undocumented immigrants. “Each of the plaintiffs in this case has already been forced to choose between accepting these unlawful conditions or forgoing critical USDA funding,” according to the complaint. The USDA said the agency does not comment on pending litigation and directed questions to the U.S. Department of Justice, which did not respond to requests for comment as of press time. Since coming into office, the Trump Administration has issued several executive ordersw intended to eliminate DEI initiatives that it believes discriminatorily promote certain racial groups above others. These orders also command federal agencies to recognize only “two sexes, male and female,” rather than an “ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity.” Federal agencies have likewise been instructed to halt programs that help “illegal immigrants to obtain any cash or non-cash public benefit,” which the Trump administration says encourages illegal immigration into the U.S. The plaintiffs allege that USDA has interpreted these orders in a way that imposes “vague and unprecedented substantive requirements on USDA grantees,” raising concerns that such organizations will risk “civil and criminal liabilities” if they “misjudge how to comply” with the policies. “These mandates are untethered from existing law and are inconsistent with or contrary to the statutory mandates for certain USDA grant programs,” the complaint said. The language of these policies has left grant recipients “guessing whether any speech that touches on issues of diversity, equity or inclusion, or any initiatives that support those values, can be pursued consistent with USDA’s view of the law,” according to the lawsuit. Specifically, plaintiffs argue they’re uncertain whether any outreach to traditionally “underrepresented communities” must be discontinued, or if they can even acknowledge the “existence and dignity of transgender individuals.” It’s also unclear exactly “what kind of advocacy” about the “availability of public benefits” could be construed as incentivizing illegal immigration, the complaint said. The Washington Farmland Trust, which provides new farmers with training, technical support and access to land, said it won’t use the proceeds from an existing USDA grant or apply for future funding, as the money would likely require abandoning partnerships with underrepresented communities. “This decision has left Washington Farmland Trust with a nearly $700,000 hole in its budget,” the lawsuit said. “And it has immediately forced the organization to cut back on existing and planned work and expend substantial staff time and resources looking for alternate funding.” The Oregon Farm Corps and the Agroecology Commons, which conduct similar work in Oregon and California, respectively, said that USDA is too “essential” for the organizations to forgo, which will require altering or limiting their programs. “Although these changes will hinder OFC’s ability to fulfill its mission and uphold its values, the organization has determined that the promise of financial support from USDA is too important to give up at this point in the organization’s history,” according to Oregon Farm Corps. The lawsuit has asked a federal judge in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to block the USDA from enforcing the grant conditions, arguing they unconstitutionally violate free speech rights and due process rights, among other legal problems.