CBCF Scholarship Case
CBCF Scholarship Case
CBCF Press
Release
The Global Black Economic Forum is proud to serve as co-counsel to the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation in defending the CBCF Spouses Education Scholarship against this meritless legal challenge. Across the country, legal threats are pushing institutions to narrow or end programs before any court has ruled that those programs are unlawful. In that environment, the lawsuit itself can become the punishment.
For nearly fifty years, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation has invested in developing leaders, informing public policy, and expanding educational opportunity. For more than four decades, the Spouses Education Scholarship has helped students pursue undergraduate, graduate, doctoral, and professional degrees while advancing CBCF's longstanding educational mission.
The Global Black Economic Forum believes educational opportunity strengthens our democracy and economy. We joined this case because the facts and the law support CBCF, but also because the stakes reach far beyond one scholarship. We are proud to stand alongside CBCF in defending the constitutional and legal principles that allow charitable organizations to serve communities, expand opportunity, and invest in future generations. We remain confident that the law and the facts are on our side and expect this meritless lawsuit to be dismissed.
CASE OVERVIEW
Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Case Style: American Alliance for Equal Rights and Defending Education v. Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Inc.
Case Number: 1:26-cv-01123-JDB
Initial Filing Date: April 2, 2026
Amended Complaint Filed: June 3, 2026
Motion to Dismiss Filed: July 16, 2026
Type of Action: Federal civil rights challenge under 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Current Filing: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint
Relief Sought by CBCF: Dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)
PLAINTIFFS
American Alliance for Equal Rights & Defending Education
DEFENDANTS
Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Inc.
BACKGROUND
The American Alliance for Equal Rights filed suit on April 2, 2026. Defending Education joined through an amended complaint filed on June 3, 2026. The plaintiffs allege — on behalf of three students — that the scholarship unlawfully excludes applicants who are not Black and restricts eligibility based on whether an applicant lives or attends school in a congressional district represented by a member of the Congressional Black Caucus.
CBCF maintains that applicants of all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds are eligible and will not be evaluated on the basis of race. CBCF filed a motion to dismiss the case on July 16, 2026
LEGAL ARGUMENT
CBCF advances several core arguments in support of dismissal including:
1. Jurisdictional/Procedural:
CBCF argues that the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction in this case for several reasons including that the claims are not ripe, the alleged members who seeking relief do not have standing, and the Speech or Debate Clause bars review here.
2. Failure to Allege a Claim:
To state a Section 1981 claim, plaintiffs must show that race was the but-for cause of the alleged loss of a legally protected right. CBCF argues that race cannot be the cause of any injury because it is not part of the 2026 selection criteria. For the two students who did not apply, CBCF further argues that their failure to submit applications—not their race—prevented them from being considered for an award.
3. First Amendment Protected Activity:
CBCF argues that Plaintiffs’ request for the Court to intervene in CBCF’s process violates the First Amendment because it is intended to chill CBCF’s speech in the form of decisions it makes.
ATTORNEYS
Co-Counsel: Alphonso David, Global Black Economic Forum.
Co-Counsel: Jason C. Schwartz, Mylan L. Denerstein, Gregg J. Costa, Stuart F. Delery, Zakiyyah T. Salim-Williams, and Katherine M. Marquart of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
BACKGROUND
The Texas Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Program, codified under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161, was enacted in the 1990s to remedy documented discrimination in state contracting and expand access to economic opportunity.
The statute defines HUBs as small businesses majority-owned by economically disadvantaged individuals, including Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, women, Asian Pacific Americans, Native Americans, and disabled veterans.
On December 2, 2025, Acting Comptroller Hancock issued emergency regulations restructuring the program exclusively for service-disabled veteran-owned businesses and renaming it “VetHUB.”
On January 6, 2026, the Comptroller decertified thousands of minority- and women-owned businesses.
In March 2026, the Comptroller introduced proposed rules that mirror the emergency regulation—seeking to make these changes permanent despite ongoing litigation.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
The plaintiffs advance four core legal claims.
1. Ultra Vires Action (Exceeding Authority):
The Comptroller exceeded his statutory authority under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161 by attempting to rewrite and narrow the definition of HUB eligibility—power reserved to the Legislature.
2. Procedural Violations:
Both the emergency rule and proposed regulations fail to comply with the Texas Administrative Procedure Act, including requirements for notice, justification, and public participation.
3. Constitutional Violations (Due Process & Equal Protection):
The mass decertification of businesses without notice or opportunity to be heard deprived plaintiffs of a state-created property interest in violation of the Texas Constitution.
4. Separation of Powers:
The Comptroller’s actions usurp legislative authority and undermine the constitutional structure of Texas government.
The Legislature’s rejection of House Bill 167 in the 2025 session—legislation that would have implemented similar changes—further underscores that these actions bypass the lawful legislative process.
KEY FACTS & FIGURES
Approximately 16,000+ HUB-certified businesses existed prior to January 2026; fewer than 500 remain after decertification
Remaining certified businesses are almost exclusively service-disabled veteran-owned
In FY2024, HUB-certified businesses received approximately $4.1 billion in state contracts
In the first half of FY2025, TxDOT, HHSC, and TFC alone spent more than $1.6 billion on HUB-related contracts
State agencies have begun disregarding statutory HUB requirements, including assistance, subcontracting plans, and good-faith participation obligations
The challenged rules threaten millions in contracts, ongoing negotiations, and business viability across multiple industries
RELIEF SOUGHT
Declaration that the emergency and proposed regulations are null and void
Temporary and permanent injunction blocking enforcement of both rules
Reinstatement of plaintiffs’ HUB certifications
Order requiring state agencies to comply with statutory HUB obligations
Attorney’s fees and costs under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 37.009, 106.002(b)
ATTORNEYS
Co-Lead Counsel: Alphonso David, Global Black Economic Forum.
Co-Lead Counsel: Adam Schuman, David Hoffman, Shanice Hinckson, Petrillo Klein + Boxer LLP.
Local Counsel: Chad W. Dunn, Brazil & Dunn LLP.
KEY FACTS & FIGURES
CBCF was established in 1976 and is marking 50 years of public policy, educational, and leadership development work.
The Spouses Education Scholarship was established in 1988.
Race is not an eligibility requirement for the 2026 scholarship cycle.
Applicants were not required to disclose their race or ethnicity.
The 2026 application opened on January 5, 2026, and closed on March 27, 2026.
CBCF removed outdated FAQ language on January 8, 2026.
The lawsuit was filed on April 2, 2026.
The amended complaint was filed on June 3, 2026.
CBCF filed its motion to dismiss on July 16, 2026.
Only one of the three anonymous students identified by plaintiffs submitted a 2026 application.
No 2026 scholarship recipients had been selected when the motion to dismiss was filed.
CBCF maintains that applicants of all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds are eligible and will not be evaluated on the basis of race.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Dismiss the amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1).
Find that the plaintiffs lack standing.
Find that the plaintiffs' claims are not ripe.
Dismiss the claim concerning Congressional Black Caucus membership under the Speech or Debate Clause.
Dismiss the amended complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Find that plaintiffs failed to plausibly allege intentional discrimination, but-for causation, or a contractual relationship under Section 1981.
Reject relief that would impermissibly burden CBCF's First Amendment rights.
BACKGROUND
The Texas Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Program, codified under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161, was enacted in the 1990s to remedy documented discrimination in state contracting and expand access to economic opportunity.
The statute defines HUBs as small businesses majority-owned by economically disadvantaged individuals, including Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, women, Asian Pacific Americans, Native Americans, and disabled veterans.
On December 2, 2025, Acting Comptroller Hancock issued emergency regulations restructuring the program exclusively for service-disabled veteran-owned businesses and renaming it “VetHUB.”
On January 6, 2026, the Comptroller decertified thousands of minority- and women-owned businesses.
In March 2026, the Comptroller introduced proposed rules that mirror the emergency regulation—seeking to make these changes permanent despite ongoing litigation.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
The plaintiffs advance four core legal claims.
1. Ultra Vires Action (Exceeding Authority):
The Comptroller exceeded his statutory authority under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161 by attempting to rewrite and narrow the definition of HUB eligibility—power reserved to the Legislature.
2. Procedural Violations:
Both the emergency rule and proposed regulations fail to comply with the Texas Administrative Procedure Act, including requirements for notice, justification, and public participation.
3. Constitutional Violations (Due Process & Equal Protection):
The mass decertification of businesses without notice or opportunity to be heard deprived plaintiffs of a state-created property interest in violation of the Texas Constitution.
4. Separation of Powers:
The Comptroller’s actions usurp legislative authority and undermine the constitutional structure of Texas government.
The Legislature’s rejection of House Bill 167 in the 2025 session—legislation that would have implemented similar changes—further underscores that these actions bypass the lawful legislative process.
KEY FACTS & FIGURES
Approximately 16,000+ HUB-certified businesses existed prior to January 2026; fewer than 500 remain after decertification
Remaining certified businesses are almost exclusively service-disabled veteran-owned
In FY2024, HUB-certified businesses received approximately $4.1 billion in state contracts
In the first half of FY2025, TxDOT, HHSC, and TFC alone spent more than $1.6 billion on HUB-related contracts
State agencies have begun disregarding statutory HUB requirements, including assistance, subcontracting plans, and good-faith participation obligations
The challenged rules threaten millions in contracts, ongoing negotiations, and business viability across multiple industries
RELIEF SOUGHT
Declaration that the emergency and proposed regulations are null and void
Temporary and permanent injunction blocking enforcement of both rules
Reinstatement of plaintiffs’ HUB certifications
Order requiring state agencies to comply with statutory HUB obligations
Attorney’s fees and costs under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 37.009, 106.002(b)
ATTORNEYS
Co-Lead Counsel: Alphonso David, Global Black Economic Forum.
Co-Lead Counsel: Adam Schuman, David Hoffman, Shanice Hinckson, Petrillo Klein + Boxer LLP.
Local Counsel: Chad W. Dunn, Brazil & Dunn LLP.
ABOUT THE CASE
The Global Black Economic Forum is proud to serve as co-counsel to the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation in defending the CBCF Spouses Education Scholarship against this meritless legal challenge. Across the country, legal threats are pushing institutions to narrow or end programs before any court has ruled that those programs are unlawful. In that environment, the lawsuit itself can become the punishment.
For nearly fifty years, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation has invested in developing leaders, informing public policy, and expanding educational opportunity. For more than four decades, the Spouses Education Scholarship has helped students pursue undergraduate, graduate, doctoral, and professional degrees while advancing CBCF's longstanding educational mission.
The Global Black Economic Forum believes educational opportunity strengthens our democracy and economy. We joined this case because the facts and the law support CBCF, but also because the stakes reach far beyond one scholarship. We are proud to stand alongside CBCF in defending the constitutional and legal principles that allow charitable organizations to serve communities, expand opportunity, and invest in future generations. We remain confident that the law and the facts are on our side and expect this meritless lawsuit to be dismissed.
CASE OVERVIEW
Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Case Style: American Alliance for Equal Rights and Defending Education v. Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Inc.
Case Number: 1:26-cv-01123-JDB
Initial Filing Date: April 2, 2026
Amended Complaint Filed: June 3, 2026
Motion to Dismiss Filed: July 16, 2026
Type of Action: Federal civil rights challenge under 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Current Filing: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint
Relief Sought by CBCF: Dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)
PLAINTIFFS
American Alliance for Equal Rights & Defending Education
DEFENDANTS
Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Inc.
BACKGROUND
The American Alliance for Equal Rights filed suit on April 2, 2026. Defending Education joined through an amended complaint filed on June 3, 2026. The plaintiffs allege — on behalf of three students — that the scholarship unlawfully excludes applicants who are not Black and restricts eligibility based on whether an applicant lives or attends school in a congressional district represented by a member of the Congressional Black Caucus.
CBCF maintains that applicants of all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds are eligible and will not be evaluated on the basis of race. CBCF filed a motion to dismiss the case on July 16, 2026
LEGAL ARGUMENT
CBCF advances several core arguments in support of dismissal including:
1. Jurisdictional/Procedural: CBCF argues that the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction in this case for several reasons including that the claims are not ripe, the alleged members who seeking relief do not have standing, and the Speech or Debate Clause bars review here.
2. Failure to Allege a Claim: CBCF argues that the plaintiffs do not state facts to allege any violation of federal law.
3. First Amendment Protected Activity: CBCF argues that Plaintiffs’ request for the Court to intervene in CBCF’s process violates the First Amendment because it is intended to chill CBCF’s speech in the form of decisions it makes.
ATTORNEYS
Co-Counsel: Alphonso David, Global Black Economic Forum.
Co-Counsel: Jason C. Schwartz, Mylan L. Denerstein, Gregg J. Costa, Stuart F. Delery, Zakiyyah T. Salim-Williams, and Katherine M. Marquart of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
CBCF was established in 1976 and is marking 50 years of public policy, educational, and leadership development work.
The Spouses Education Scholarship was established in 1988.
Race is not an eligibility requirement for the 2026 scholarship cycle.
Applicants were not required to disclose their race or ethnicity.
The 2026 application opened on January 5, 2026, and closed on March 27, 2026.
CBCF removed outdated FAQ language on January 8, 2026.
The lawsuit was filed on April 2, 2026.
CBCF filed its motion to dismiss on July 16, 2026.
The amended complaint was filed on June 3, 2026.
Only one of the three anonymous students identified by plaintiffs submitted a 2026 application.
No 2026 scholarship recipients had been selected when the motion to dismiss was filed.
CBCF maintains that applicants of all races, ethnicities, and backgrounds are eligible and will not be evaluated on the basis of race.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Dismiss the amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1).
Find that the plaintiffs lack standing.
Find that the plaintiffs' claims are not ripe.
Dismiss the claim concerning Congressional Black Caucus membership under the Speech or Debate Clause.
Dismiss the amended complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Find that plaintiffs failed to plausibly allege intentional discrimination, but-for causation, or a contractual relationship under Section 1981.
Reject relief that would impermissibly burden CBCF's First Amendment rights.
IN THE NEWS
IN THE NEWS
Motion to
Dismiss
Memorandum of
Points and Authorities
Declaration of
Nicole Austin-Hillery
CBCF Press Statement
July 17, 2026
Motion to Dismiss
Memorandum of
Points and Authorities
Declaration of
Nicole Austin-Hillery
CBCF Press Statement
July 17, 2026
The HUB Case
GBEF wins temporary injunction in landmark litigation for business owners in Texas
CASE OVERVIEW
Jurisdiction: Travis County District Court, State of Texas
Case Style: Globe Express Trucking Inc., et al. v. Kelly Hancock, Acting Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, et al.
Case Number: D-1-GN-26-001941
Initial Filing Date: March 2, 2026
Updated Filing Date: March 13, 2026
Type of Action: Verified Original Petition and Application for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Relief Sought: Temporary Injunction, Permanent Injunction, Declaratory Judgment
PLAINTIFFS
Globe Express Trucking Inc. – Dallas, TX (mail delivery; founded by Black American woman Marie-Pascale Ruberandinda)
Kirstins Care LLC – Dallas, TX (childcare services; founded by Black American woman Kirstin Green)
Ipsum General Contractors, LLC – Houston, TX (general contractor; founded by Hispanic American Ruben Mercado Jr.)
Mpulse Healthcare & Technology, LLC – Sugar Land, TX (medical technology distributor; owned by Black American Tyrone Dixon)
Williams Professional Water Restoration Service LLC – Burleson, TX (restoration services; owned by Black American woman Cortena Williams)
Houston WiFi, Ltd. Co. d/b/a Houston Construction Services – Houston, TX (general contractor; owned by Hispanic American Ray Gutierrez)
NAMC, Inc. – Greater Houston Chapter – Houston, TX (nonprofit trade association representing 150+ minority- and women-owned contractors)
DEFENDANTS
Kelly Hancock, Acting Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts (official capacity)
Adriana Cruz, Executive Director, Texas Economic Development & Tourism Office (official capacity)
Marc D. Williams, Executive Director, Texas Department of Transportation (official capacity)
Stephanie Muth, Executive Commissioner, Texas Health and Human Services Commission (official capacity)
Will Mckerall, Executive Director, Texas Facilities Commission (official capacity)
CASE OVERVIEW
Jurisdiction: Travis County District Court, State of Texas
Case Style: Globe Express Trucking Inc., et al. v. Kelly Hancock, Acting Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, et al.
Case Number: D-1-GN-26-001941
Initial Filing Date: March 2, 2026
Updated Filing Date: March 13, 2026
Hearing Date: March 30, 2026, 9:00 AM CT
Type of Action: Verified Original Petition and Application for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Relief Sought: Temporary Injunction, Permanent Injunction, Declaratory Judgment
PLAINTIFFS
Globe Express Trucking Inc. – Dallas, TX (mail delivery; founded by Black American woman Marie-Pascale Ruberandinda)
Kirstins Care LLC – Dallas, TX (childcare services; founded by Black American woman Kirstin Green)
Ipsum General Contractors, LLC – Houston, TX (general contractor; founded by Hispanic American Ruben Mercado Jr.)
Mpulse Healthcare & Technology, LLC – Sugar Land, TX (medical technology distributor; owned by Black American Tyrone Dixon)
Williams Professional Water Restoration Service LLC – Burleson, TX (restoration services; owned by Black American woman Cortena Williams)
Houston WiFi, Ltd. Co. d/b/a Houston Construction Services – Houston, TX (general contractor; owned by Hispanic American Ray Gutierrez)
NAMC, Inc. – Greater Houston Chapter – Houston, TX (nonprofit trade association representing 150+ minority- and women-owned contractors)
DEFENDANTS
Kelly Hancock, Acting Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts (official capacity)
Adriana Cruz, Executive Director, Texas Economic Development & Tourism Office (official capacity)
Marc D. Williams, Executive Director, Texas Department of Transportation (official capacity)
Stephanie Muth, Executive Commissioner, Texas Health and Human Services Commission (official capacity)
Will Mckerall, Executive Director, Texas Facilities Commission (official capacity)
BACKGROUND
The Texas Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Program, codified under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161, was enacted in the 1990s to remedy documented discrimination in state contracting and expand access to economic opportunity.
The statute defines HUBs as small businesses majority-owned by economically disadvantaged individuals, including Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, women, Asian Pacific Americans, Native Americans, and disabled veterans.
On December 2, 2025, Acting Comptroller Hancock issued emergency regulations restructuring the program exclusively for service-disabled veteran-owned businesses and renaming it “VetHUB.”
On January 6, 2026, the Comptroller decertified thousands of minority- and women-owned businesses.
In March 2026, the Comptroller introduced proposed rules that mirror the emergency regulation—seeking to make these changes permanent despite ongoing litigation.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
The plaintiffs advance four core legal claims.
1. Ultra Vires Action (Exceeding Authority):
The Comptroller exceeded his statutory authority under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161 by attempting to rewrite and narrow the definition of HUB eligibility—power reserved to the Legislature.
2. Procedural Violations:
Both the emergency rule and proposed regulations fail to comply with the Texas Administrative Procedure Act, including requirements for notice, justification, and public participation.
3. Constitutional Violations (Due Process & Equal Protection):
The mass decertification of businesses without notice or opportunity to be heard deprived plaintiffs of a state-created property interest in violation of the Texas Constitution.
4. Separation of Powers:
The Comptroller’s actions usurp legislative authority and undermine the constitutional structure of Texas government.
The Legislature’s rejection of House Bill 167 in the 2025 session—legislation that would have implemented similar changes—further underscores that these actions bypass the lawful legislative process.
KEY FACTS & FIGURES
Approximately 16,000+ HUB-certified businesses existed prior to January 2026; fewer than 500 remain after decertification
Remaining certified businesses are almost exclusively service-disabled veteran-owned
In FY2024, HUB-certified businesses received approximately $4.1 billion in state contracts
In the first half of FY2025, TxDOT, HHSC, and TFC alone spent more than $1.6 billion on HUB-related contracts
State agencies have begun disregarding statutory HUB requirements, including assistance, subcontracting plans, and good-faith participation obligations
The challenged rules threaten millions in contracts, ongoing negotiations, and business viability across multiple industries
RELIEF SOUGHT
Declaration that the emergency and proposed regulations are null and void
Temporary and permanent injunction blocking enforcement of both rules
Reinstatement of plaintiffs’ HUB certifications
Order requiring state agencies to comply with statutory HUB obligations
Attorney’s fees and costs under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 37.009, 106.002(b)
ATTORNEYS
Co-Lead Counsel: Alphonso David, Global Black Economic Forum.
Co-Lead Counsel: Adam Schuman, David Hoffman, Shanice Hinckson, Petrillo Klein + Boxer LLP.
Local Counsel: Chad W. Dunn, Brazil & Dunn LLP.
BACKGROUND
The Texas Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Program, codified under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161, was enacted in the 1990s to remedy documented discrimination in state contracting and expand access to economic opportunity.
The statute defines HUBs as small businesses majority-owned by economically disadvantaged individuals, including Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, women, Asian Pacific Americans, Native Americans, and disabled veterans.
On December 2, 2025, Acting Comptroller Hancock issued emergency regulations restructuring the program exclusively for service-disabled veteran-owned businesses and renaming it “VetHUB.”
On January 6, 2026, the Comptroller decertified thousands of minority- and women-owned businesses.
In March 2026, the Comptroller introduced proposed rules that mirror the emergency regulation—seeking to make these changes permanent despite ongoing litigation.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
The plaintiffs advance four core legal claims.
1. Ultra Vires Action (Exceeding Authority):
The Comptroller exceeded his statutory authority under Tex. Gov’t Code Chapter 2161 by attempting to rewrite and narrow the definition of HUB eligibility—power reserved to the Legislature.
2. Procedural Violations:
Both the emergency rule and proposed regulations fail to comply with the Texas Administrative Procedure Act, including requirements for notice, justification, and public participation.
3. Constitutional Violations (Due Process & Equal Protection):
The mass decertification of businesses without notice or opportunity to be heard deprived plaintiffs of a state-created property interest in violation of the Texas Constitution.
4. Separation of Powers:
The Comptroller’s actions usurp legislative authority and undermine the constitutional structure of Texas government.
The Legislature’s rejection of House Bill 167 in the 2025 session—legislation that would have implemented similar changes—further underscores that these actions bypass the lawful legislative process.
KEY FACTS & FIGURES
Approximately 16,000+ HUB-certified businesses existed prior to January 2026; fewer than 500 remain after decertification
Remaining certified businesses are almost exclusively service-disabled veteran-owned
In FY2024, HUB-certified businesses received approximately $4.1 billion in state contracts
In the first half of FY2025, TxDOT, HHSC, and TFC alone spent more than $1.6 billion on HUB-related contracts
State agencies have begun disregarding statutory HUB requirements, including assistance, subcontracting plans, and good-faith participation obligations
The challenged rules threaten millions in contracts, ongoing negotiations, and business viability across multiple industries
RELIEF SOUGHT
Declaration that the emergency and proposed regulations are null and void
Temporary and permanent injunction blocking enforcement of both rules
Reinstatement of plaintiffs’ HUB certifications
Order requiring state agencies to comply with statutory HUB obligations
Attorney’s fees and costs under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 37.009, 106.002(b)
ATTORNEYS
Co-Lead Counsel: Alphonso David, Global Black Economic Forum.
Co-Lead Counsel: Adam Schuman, David Hoffman, Shanice Hinckson, Petrillo Klein + Boxer LLP.
Local Counsel: Chad W. Dunn, Brazil & Dunn LLP.
IN THE NEWS
Join Us In Action
Become part of our global community working to make economic justice a reality for all.
© 2025 Global Black Economic Forum. All Rights Reserved.
Join Us In Action
Become part of our global community working to make economic justice a reality for all.
© 2025 Global Black Economic Forum.
All Rights Reserved.