Strickland v. United States Department of Agriculture
2:24-cv-00060
N.D. Tex.May 15, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs challenged certain USDA programs, alleging race and sex discrimination.
- The USDA no longer defends the challenged aspects of the programs and seeks to revise them.
- Both parties jointly moved for voluntary remand to allow USDA to reconsider and potentially modify these programs.
- The main remaining dispute is about the ultimate result USDA will reach after reconsideration, not whether remand should happen.
- The parties requested a remand deadline of September 30, 2025, with the court retaining jurisdiction during remand.
- The Court granted the unopposed motion, staying all proceedings and commanding a status report after USDA’s reconsideration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voluntary remand to USDA appropriate? | Supported remand | Supported remand | Granted unopposed motion for remand |
| Retaining court jurisdiction appropriate? | Supported retention | Supported retention | Court retains jurisdiction during remand |
| Timeframe for USDA’s reconsideration | Sought deadline & status report | Agreed to terms | USDA to complete by Sep 30, 2025; report required |
| Resolution of underlying discrimination allegations | Programs discriminatory | Will revise programs | Remand to USDA for reconsideration |
Key Cases Cited
- ConocoPhillips Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 612 F.3d 822 (5th Cir. 2010) (agency may reconsider its own decisions)
- Limnia, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 857 F.3d 379 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (court discretion on voluntary agency remands)
- Ethyl Corp. v. Browner, 989 F.2d 522 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (preferable for agencies to cure their own errors)