Though it has been over ten years since they initially filed their claim, Native American farmers are still waiting for some relief for the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA) alleged discrimination in the disbursement of farm loans.The Native American farmers claim in Keepseagle v. Vilsack, named for plaintiff George Keepseagle, that the USDA routinely denied them access to the same loans they regularly gave white farmers. According to Marcia Coyle's report in the National Law Journal, the Native American farmers allege this discrimination "caused the loss of billions of dollars in credit over a 25-year period." Additionally, the suit claims the USDA failed to investigate civil rights complaints filed by the Native American farmers and ranchers.
According to Coyle, the class action includes all Native Americans who farmed or ranched in the time period between 1981 and 1999, if during that period they applied to participate in some farm program "and filed a discrimination complaint with the department during that time period."
Several important deadlines are approaching in the case. In December, 2009 USDA Secretary Vilsack and the plaintiffs sought a stay in the class action case to work further on negotiating a settlement to the case. The stay was granted by US District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Emmet Sullivan, as was an extension, but now the stay expires on April 21, 2010, and a status report on how the negotiations are proceeding is due on April 15, 2010.
Lead counsel for the plaintiffs, Joseph Sellers, of Washington's Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, believes the two parties are not close to reaching a settlement. The main concern of the plaintiffs, according to Sellers, is to move the case along to achieve some sort of closure in the matter.
This lawsuit is very similar to the Pigford suit, in which African-American farmers alleged the USDA discriminated against them in disbursing farm loans. Recently, late-claim filing farmers reached an agreement with the government in which they will receive $1.25 billion, but those monies must be funded by Congressional action, and thus far Congress has missed the deadline to act on legislation to provide the funding.
The Keepseagle claims do not need an act of Congress to be settled. In fact, if a settlement was reached between the farmers and the government the claims could be paid from the government's "Treasury Judgment Fund, which does not require congressional action, according to Sellers." This fund was established in the 1950's to pay court judgments and settlement agreements that the Justice Department negotiates for other federal agencies. The fund was made an indefinite appropriation by Congress, reports Coyle.
The Native American farmers do have some allies in Congress. US Reps. Dale Kildee (MI) and Tom Cole (OK), who co-chair the Native American Caucus, sent a letter on March 26, 2010 to Secretary Vilsack urging the secretary to settle the case on terms "comparable" to the settlement negotiated with the African-American farmers in the Pigford suit. The letter states, '"We trust that you will agree that Native American farmers and ranchers should have their claims resolved and be provided comparable relief, since they were victims of the same discrimination committed by the same agency over the same time period, and since they too lost substantial revenue and lands that had been in their families for generations [.]"'
At this point Sellers is unsure whether his clients would be willing to postpone the case once more if the department asks them to in order to continue negotiating. Sellers did state in the Coyle article that he thinks '"our clients remain resolute in their belief that statements by the secretary of Agriculture that he wants to settle [the] case are ones they can rely on."'
To read the Coyle article in the National Law Journal, click here.
To read a previous US Agricultural & Food Law and Policy Blog Post on the case, click here.
Posted: 04/09/10
