Biden signed, in 2021, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and in that was the provision to create the newest federal agency, the MBDA, which is "dedicated entirely to providing benefits and programming only to certain businesses based on race or ethnicity," WILL documented.

"The federal court declared what we know is the law and the right thing: the government may not discriminate based on race. Without equality, our other rights mean little if anything at all. WILL is committed to preserving that fundamental principle and our fight is far from over," explained WILL President Rick Esenberg.

And associate counsel Cara Tolliver added, "It is repugnant to human dignity to presume a diminished ability or inability to succeed or to grant or deny a benefit, on the basis of race. The Biden Administration’s MBDA offers no constitutional justification for its broad race-based program. WILL will continue to vindicate basic notions of human dignity embraced in the doctrine of equality."

The opinion came from a federal court in Texas, which said, "[t]he Constitution demands equal treatment under the law" and that a program that employs race-conscious measures for eligibility must meet strict standards for justification to survive constitutional scrutiny.

The MBDA worked on the presumption that the government was justified in giving preferential treatment based on race.

The case was brought on behalf of Jeffrey Nuziard and others.

U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman explained under his order the Wisconsin MDBA Business Center and others were not allowed to impose "the racial and ethnic classifications … against the plaintiffs."

He noted the plaintiffs allege the defendants "infringed their rights under the Fifth Amendment" and those violations are "irreparable injuries."

Further, he noted the government never said it even considered or tried "race-neutral" plans that might reach the same goal. But a "review" the government offered in support of its racist program even emphasized "the need for both race-neutral and race-conscious remedial efforts," the judge found.

The judge explained, "In sum, Nuziard has suffered an injury in fact because he is able and ready to apply for the center’s benefits in the absence of the race-and-ethnicity requirement. That injury is fairly traceable to defendants because they impose that requirement on the center. And an injunction preventing the center from enforcing that requirement would redress Nuziard’s injury."