Federal Farm Grants Partially Restored By Judge’s Order

A federal district court has issued an order restoring grants to 24 organizations and local governments supporting underserved food producers. 

Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled Tuesday in the USDN v. USDA case that the plaintiffs “have demonstrated that the terminations of their individual grants were likely contrary to statute, that they will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief, and that the balance of equities and public interest favor preliminary injunctive relief.” 

The Increasing Land, Capital, and Market Access program from the U.S. Department of Agriculture was created by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to target agricultural projects that address land access issues facing underrepresented groups — including veterans, Black farmers and Indigenous farmers.  

But at the end of March, the Trump administration suddenly cut the $300 million program, with termination letters from the USDA including claims of “discriminatory preferences based on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) and wasteful spending.” That was after the USDA had already frozen funding, withheld required approvals for core project activities, and failed to provide basic grant management communication for a majority of 2025. 

The Nourish West Virginia initiative at West Virginia University, which was administering the state’s $8.5 million from the program, was one of the programs that had their funding cut in March. WVU and 42 of the other 49 terminated programs submitted appeals to the USDA. But Govindan said the agency determined in April those decisions cannot be challenged, leaving the courts as their only recourse. 

USDN v. USDA was originally filed in June 2025 by the Urban Sustainability Directors Network, a professional network of sustainability practitioners representing more than 250 cities and counties across the United States and Canada in conjunction with 24 organizations whose grants were directly affected by the USDA’s actions. Their complaint alleges that following several 2025 Trump executive orders targeting climate action and efforts to support diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, USDA and DOGE “began engaging in a policy, pattern, and practice of unlawfully terminating federal grant awards.” 

In finding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in their claim that termination was contrary to law, Howell agreed with the defendants’ assertions that the USDA was disregarding Congress’ intentions. 

“While defendants might have policy disagreements with a statute that considers an applicant’s “race or other protected class” they “flout Congress’s mandates . . . when they terminate grants for the very reason that the grants further the aims Congress explicitly instructed defendants to pursue,” he wrote. 

While WVU did not have its grant restored by Tuesday’s order, it does present a clear path to restoration. Howell ordered the USDA to update the court on efforts to reinstate the terminated grant awards totaling $127 million by 5PM ET on Friday, July 3.