In an article published January 20, 2026, in City Journal, authors Judge Glock and Christopher F. Rufo argue that the Small Business Administration (SBA) continues to award billions in federal contracts based on race and sex through its 8(a) Business Development Program, even under the Trump administration.
The piece contends that despite President Trump's campaign promises to eliminate federal DEI initiatives and an executive order banning race- and sex-based discrimination, the 8(a) program systematically excludes white men while remaining vulnerable to fraud and abuse.
The 8(a) program, the federal government's largest disadvantaged-business initiative, provides set-aside contracts to firms deemed "socially and economically disadvantaged." Historically, the SBA presumed racial minorities and women were disadvantaged, but a 2023 federal district court ruling struck down this race-based presumption as unconstitutional. In response, the SBA shifted to requiring applicants to submit personal "social disadvantage narratives"—detailed essays describing experiences of bias. The authors describe these narratives as an evasion tactic, providing applicants with "magic words" examples (e.g., claiming loan denials due to racial or sex bias) that require no corroborating evidence, akin to college admissions essays post-affirmative action bans.
Data cited shows stark exclusion: between 2020 and 2023, these programs awarded no contracts to white men. The program reached record spending of $26 billion in fiscal year 2025. While the Biden administration had pushed for 15% of federal contracts to go to disadvantaged firms, the Trump administration reportedly scaled back to the statutory 5% goal and began requiring financial disclosures to combat fraud.
The article highlights widespread fraud. A 2018 audit of 25 8(a) firms awarded over $100 million found 20 were ineligible and should have been removed. Common schemes include white owners using minority or women "front" figures, pass-through subcontracting (where certified firms take a cut without performing work), and asset misrepresentation.
Specific cases include:
Margarita Howard of HX5 and HX5 Sierra, who paid nearly $8 million in a 2023 settlement for lying about assets while living in a 14,000-square-foot mansion. Her firms continued receiving millions in 2025 contracts as woman-owned businesses.
Charles Dawson, whose companies secured hundreds of millions promising Native Hawaiian benefits but allegedly misused funds on luxury items; operations persisted after a federal raid.
A Supreme Court case involving a "disadvantaged" firm that subcontracted an entire Philadelphia infrastructure project without providing materials.
The authors assert these practices violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by discriminating on the basis of race and sex. They criticize the narrative requirement as a "shell game" that perpetuates preferences without genuine disadvantage verification.
The article recommends full abolition of the 8(a) program rather than reform, praising Senator Joni Ernst’s proposed “Stop 8(a) Contracting Fraud Act” to halt awards pending a comprehensive audit. It concludes that truly ending DEI requires eliminating all race- and sex-based federal contracting.
Editorial comments expressed in this column are the sole opinion of the writer
