Plaintiff, a white man, is challenging the Small Business Administration (SBA)’s 8(a) Business Development Program, arguing that it unlawfully denied his application based on his race.

The Program is designed to support small business owners who are considered socially and economically disadvantaged. The program also sets aside certain government contracts exclusively for eligible participants of the program. According to Plaintiff, individuals who have faced racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias due to their group identity—regardless of their individual circumstances—are presumed to be socially disadvantaged. He claims that this presumption led to his rejection from the program twice, preventing him from competing on equal terms.

In March 2023, the SBA asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that Plaintiff lacked standing and that his claims had no merit. Regarding standing, the SBA argued that Plaintiff failed to show that the program’s race-conscious eligibility rules were directly responsible for his rejection. Specifically, they stated that applicants must demonstrate both social and economic disadvantage to qualify, and Plaintiff had not shown that he met the economic disadvantage requirement. They also argued that Plaintiff did not show any harm from being denied, such as business losses. Regarding the merits of the case, the SBA asserted that the program’s criteria do not violate the Equal Protection Clause.

On February 15, 2024, the court agreed with the SBA and dismissed the complaint for lack of standing without ruling on whether the claims were legally valid.