Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings Greer's Ranch Cafe v. Guzman (SBA) Class action complaint — Greer's Ranch Cafe v. Guzman (SBA) — Greer's Ranch Cafe v. Guzman (SBA) (N.D. Tex.)

Court filing

Class action complaint — Greer's Ranch Cafe v. Guzman (SBA) — Greer's Ranch Cafe v. Guzman (SBA) (N.D. Tex.)

Filed May 13, 2021 in Greer's Ranch Cafe v. Guzman (SBA); one of 4 filings from this case.

Record facts

CourtU.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division
Filed2021-05-13

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division · No. 4:21-cv-00651-O · Doc. 1 · 2021-05-13 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

plaintiffs’ class-action complaint 
 
Page 1 of 7 
U N I T E D  S T A T E S  D I S T R I C T  C O U R T  
F O R  T H E  N O R T H E R N  D I S T R I C T  O F  T E X A S  
F O R T  W O R T H  D I V I S I O N  
 
 
 
Greer’s Ranch Café and Philip Greer, 
on behalf of themselves and others 
similarly situated, 
Plaintiffs, 
v. 
Isabella Casillas Guzman, in her official 
capacity as administrator of the Small 
Business Administration; United States 
Small Business Administration, 
Defendant. 
 
 
 
   Case No. 4:21-cv-00651 
 
 
 
PLAINTIFFS’ CLASS-ACTION COMPLAINT 
The Supreme Court of the United States said 125 years ago that:  
[T]he constitution of the United States, in its present form, forbids, so 
far as civil and political rights are concerned, discrimination by the gen-
eral government, or by the states, against any citizen because of his race. 
All citizens are equal before the law. The guaranties of life, liberty, and 
property are for all persons, within the jurisdiction of the United States, 
or of any state, without discrimination against any because of their race. 
Those guaranties, when their violation is properly presented in the reg-
ular course of proceedings, must be enforced in the courts, both of the 
nation and of the state, without reference to considerations based upon 
race. 
Gibson v. State of Mississippi, 162 U.S. 565, 591 (1896); see also Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 
U.S. 497 (1954) (citing Gibson and holding that segregation in the District of Co-
lumbia public schools violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment). 
Equal rights under law is the cornerstone of American constitutional jurispru-
dence: the principle that all citizens, regardless of status, wealth, race, color, religion, 
or creed, have the same rights and are entitled to the same standard of justice. These 
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 1 of 7   PageID 1
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 1 of 7   PageID 1

plaintiffs’ class-action complaint 
 
Page 2 of 7 
are the principles etched into our founding documents, fought for on our nation’s 
battlefields, written into the Gettysburg Address, and delivered from the steps of the 
Lincoln Memorial by Martin Luther King. 
As a nation, we are devoted to the task of satisfying these sacred ideals and provid-
ing equal rights to citizens of all races, as the Constitution requires. Profound progress 
has been made, and extraordinary milestones reached, throughout our history, serving 
as an inspiration to humanity and the nations of the world. Yet, today, the Small Busi-
ness Administration lurches America dangerously backward, reversing the clock on 
American progress, and violating our most sacred and revered principles by actively 
and invidiously discriminating against American citizens solely based upon their race 
and sex. This is illegal, it is unconstitutional, it is wrong, and it must stop.  
Section 5003 of the American Rescue Plan Act appropriates $28.6 billion to cre-
ate the Restaurant Revitalization Fund, which is administered by the Small Business 
Administration. This fund provides relief for restaurants harmed by the COVID-19 
pandemic, but it requires the Small Business Administration to discriminate among 
restaurants according to the race and sex of the owner. The statute provides that dur-
ing the first 21 days of this program, which started on May 3, 2021, the administrator 
of the SBA must “prioritize awarding grants” to businesses owned by women and 
racial minorities. See American Rescue Plan Act § 5003(c)(3)(A) (attached as Exhibit 
1).  
These race and sex preferences are patently unconstitutional, and the Court 
should promptly enjoin their enforcement. Doing so will promote equal rights under 
the law for all American citizens and promote efforts to stop racial discrimination, 
because “[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating 
on the basis of race.” Parents Involved in Cmty. Sch. v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1, 551 U.S. 
701, 748 (2007) (Roberts, C.J., concurring).  
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 2 of 7   PageID 2
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 2 of 7   PageID 2

plaintiffs’ class-action complaint 
 
Page 3 of 7 
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 
1. The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 
U.S.C. § 1343. 
2. Venue is proper because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the 
claims occurred in this judicial district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2). 
PARTIES 
3. Plaintiff Greer’s Ranch Café is a limited liability company incorporated under 
the laws of Texas. It operates in Erath County, Texas. 
4. Plaintiff Philip Greer is the owner of Greer’s Ranch Café. He resides in Erath 
County, Texas.  
5. Defendant Isabella Casillas Guzman is administrator of the Small Business 
Administration. Administrator Guzman is sued in her official capacity. 
6. Defendant United States Small Business Administration is an agency of the 
United States government. 
STATEMENT OF FACTS 
7. Section 5003 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, H.R. 1319, 117th 
Cong. (2021), provides aid to restaurants that have been harmed by the COVID-19 
pandemic. It appropriates $28.6 billion to create the Restaurant Revitalization Fund, 
which will be administered by the Small Business Administration.  
8. Section 5003 provides that during the first 21 days of this program, which 
started on May 3, 2021, the administrator of the SBA must “prioritize awarding 
grants” to businesses owned by women and racial minorities. See American Rescue 
Plan Act § 5003(c)(3)(A) (attached as Exhibit 1).  
9. Plaintiff Philip Greer owns Greer’s Ranch Café. Mr. Greer intends to apply 
for relief from the Restaurant Revitalization Fund, and he stands able and ready to 
apply for that relief. See Carney v. Adams, 141 S. Ct. 493, 499–500 (2020). Yet Mr. 
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 3 of 7   PageID 3
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 3 of 7   PageID 3

plaintiffs’ class-action complaint 
 
Page 4 of 7 
Greer is white, and he fails to qualify as a “socially disadvantaged individual” or “eco-
nomically disadvantaged individual” under the SBA’s regulations. See 13 C.F.R. 
§§ 124.103, .104. Mr. Greer and his restaurant are therefore being subjected to un-
constitutional race and sex discrimination by the “priorities” that the statute com-
mands for minority- and women-owned businesses.  
10. Yesterday, the Small Business Administration issued a press release announc-
ing that it has already received 147,000 applications from “women, veterans, and so-
cially and economically disadvantaged business owners, requesting a total of $29 bil-
lion in relief funds.” See Exhibit 2. This raises the possibility that the entire $28.6 
billion that Congress allocated to the Restaurant Revitalization Fund will be depleted 
before white men such as Mr. Greer can even be considered for relief under the pro-
gram.  
11. Mr. Greer and Greer’s Ranch Café sue on behalf of all restaurant owners 
and restaurants in the United States who are encountering or who will encounter race 
or sex discrimination from the Small Business Administration on account of section 
5003. 
CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
12. The Constitution prohibits the federal government from discriminating on 
account of race or ethnicity. See Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954). The Consti-
tution likewise prohibits the federal government from engaging in sex discrimination 
absent an “exceedingly persuasive justification.” See United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 
515, 531 (1996). 
13. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the 
grounds of race, color, or national origin in any program that receives federal funds. 
See 42 U.S.C. § 2000d.  
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 4 of 7   PageID 4
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 4 of 7   PageID 4

plaintiffs’ class-action complaint 
 
Page 5 of 7 
14. The Small Business Administration is violating the Constitution and Title 
VI by discriminating on account of race and sex in administering the Restaurant Re-
vitalization Fund. 
15. The Court should declare these race and sex preferences unconstitutional 
and permanently enjoin the administrator of the SBA from implementing any such 
race or sex exclusions in any of the SBA’s programs.  
16. The Court should also award a temporary restraining order to prevent the 
implementation of race and sex preferences during the 21-day window described in 
section 5003. 
CLASS-ACTION ALLEGATIONS 
17. The plaintiffs bring this class action under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal 
Rules of Civil Procedure. 
18. The plaintiffs seek to represent a class of all restaurant owners and restau-
rants in the United States who are encountering or who will encounter race or sex 
discrimination from the Small Business Administration on account of section 5003. 
19. The number of individuals in this class makes joinder of the individual class 
members impractical. 
20. There are questions of law common to the class, including whether the Con-
stitution or Title VI allows the SBA to discriminate on account of race and sex when 
administering the Restaurant Revitalization Fund.  
21. The plaintiffs’ claims are typical of other members of the class. Each of them 
seeks to stop the SBA from discriminating on account of race and sex when adminis-
tering the Restaurant Revitalization Fund.  
22. The plaintiffs adequately represent the interests of the class, and they have 
no interests antagonistic to the class. 
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 5 of 7   PageID 5
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 5 of 7   PageID 5

plaintiffs’ class-action complaint 
 
Page 6 of 7 
23. A class action is appropriate under Rule 23(b)(2) because the defendants 
are acting on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or 
corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the classes as a whole. 
DEMAND FOR RELIEF 
24. The plaintiffs respectfully requests that the court: 
a.  
certify a class of all restaurant owners and restaurants in the United 
States that are encountering or that will encounter race or sex dis-
crimination from the Small Business Administration on account of 
section 5003; 
b. 
award the declaratory relief described in paragraph 15; 
c. 
enter an temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and per-
manent injunction that prevent Administrator Guzman and her suc-
cessors from implementing any race or sex preferences in SBA pro-
grams; 
d. 
award costs and attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988;  
e.  
award all other relief that the Court may deem just, proper, or equi-
table. 
 
 
 
Gene P. Hamilton* 
Virginia Bar No. 80434 
Vice-President and General Counsel 
America First Legal Foundation 
300 Independence Avenue SE 
Washington, DC 20003 
(202) 964-3721 
gene.hamilton@aflegal.org 
 
Charles W. Fillmore 
H. Dustin Fillmore 
The Fillmore Law Firm, L.L.P. 
Respectfully submitted. 
 
 /s/ Jonathan F. Mitchell  
Jonathan F. Mitchell 
Texas Bar No. 24075463 
Mitchell Law PLLC 
111 Congress Avenue, Suite 400 
Austin, Texas 78701 
)
0 (phone
394
-
(512) 686
 
(512) 686-3941 (fax)
 
jonathan@mitchell.law 
 
Robert Henneke 
Texas Bar No. 24046058 
Texas Public Policy Foundation 
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 6 of 7   PageID 6
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 6 of 7   PageID 6

plaintiffs’ class-action complaint 
 
Page 7 of 7 
201 Main Street, Suite 801 
Fort Worth, Texas 76102 
(817) 332-2351 (phone) 
(817) 870-1859 (fax) 
chad@fillmorefirm.com 
dusty@fillmorefirm.com 
 
* application for admission to  
   the bar of N.D. Tex. pending 
 
Dated: May 13, 2021 
901 Congress Avenue 
Austin, Texas 78735 
(512) 472-2700 (phone) 
rhenneke@texaspolicy.com 
 
 
 
 
 
Counsel for Plaintiffs and  
the Proposed Class 
 
 
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 7 of 7   PageID 7
Case 4:21-cv-00651-O   Document 1   Filed 05/13/21    Page 7 of 7   PageID 7

File and source

File
CASE_TXND_4-21-cv-00651_Greer-Ranch-v-SBA_doc1_COMPLAINT_2021-05-13.pdf
Size
126,214 bytes
SHA-256
d80c4c029c40d2850e310f5a4b19370d9ce3f6a8a0e380f81f6a326daac1ae7b
Our copy
CASE_TXND_4-21-cv-00651_Greer-Ranch-v-SBA_doc1_COMPLAINT_2021-05-13.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top