Texas judge blocks sweeping changes to minority business program, sparking major legal battle over executive power and future of diversity initiatives

Texas – A sudden courtroom decision in Texas has halted a controversial effort to reshape a long-standing state program tied to minority-owned businesses, opening a deeper fight over who actually has the power to rewrite policy. At the center of the dispute is whether a single statewide official can effectively change a law passed decades ago by the legislature—and what that could mean for programs tied to economic fairness.

In a move that immediately shifted the balance, Amy Clark Meachum of the Travis County District Court issued a temporary injunction blocking enforcement of new rules introduced by Kelly Hancock. Those changes, rolled out in late 2025, targeted the state’s Historically Underutilized Business program, widely known as HUB.

The ruling did not simply pause policy—it directly challenged the authority behind it.

“It is well settled law that the executive branch enforces the law but cannot alter pre- existing law,” Meachum wrote in her decision, adding that the comptroller “lacks the authority to determine the constitutionality” of the statute underpinning the HUB program.

A Program at the Center of a Bigger Fight

The HUB program has existed since 1987, created by the Texas Legislature to open doors for businesses that historically struggled to compete for state contracts. It includes companies owned by Black, Hispanic, Asian American, Native American, and women entrepreneurs. Over time, it has directed billions of dollars into these businesses, becoming one of the state’s main tools for addressing gaps in access.

That is why the recent rule changes triggered immediate concern. A group of companies, including Globe Express Trucking, filed a lawsuit arguing the new approach would weaken key protections and make it harder for them to compete. The court appeared to agree, warning that the changes risked causing “immediate, irreparable injury” to those relying on the program.

For many small business owners, that risk is not theoretical. HUB certification often determines whether a company can even bid on large state contracts. Without it, entire industries—construction, transport, services—can become nearly impossible to enter.

Legal Victory with Wider Implications

Civil rights attorney Alphonso David framed the ruling as more than a temporary pause. To him, it signals a line being drawn.

“This is a clear and unequivocal statement that the Comptroller violated the law,” David said. “This is a victory for the rule of law and for the thousands of businesses whose livelihoods were put at risk.”

While the injunction currently applies only to the six businesses named in the lawsuit, legal observers say the reasoning behind it could ripple much further. If upheld, it may limit how far state agencies can go when trying to reshape programs created by lawmakers—especially those tied to diversity and inclusion.

That broader tension has been building for years. Across the country, programs focused on race or equity have faced growing legal pressure. Much of that debate intensified after the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which ended affirmative action in college admissions.

Although the HUB program deals with public contracts rather than education, it sits in the same wider conversation about how far government can go in addressing inequality.

Who Holds the Power?

For attorneys leading the case, the issue goes beyond business impact—it touches the structure of government itself.

“What’s at stake is whether state officials can bypass legislatures and entrench those decisions through rulemaking,” said Adam Schuman, co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs. “The court made clear the answer is no.”

That argument cuts directly into the heart of the case. If an executive office can rewrite how a law works without legislative approval, it raises concerns about where the limits of that power lie.

The judge’s ruling suggests those limits still matter.

What Comes Next

The legal battle is far from over. The case is scheduled to move to a full trial on November 9, 2026, and the state is widely expected to challenge the injunction before then. That could push the fight into higher courts, possibly setting a precedent that reaches beyond Texas.

For now, the decision restores the HUB program—at least for the plaintiffs—to how it operated before the changes. That offers a temporary sense of stability for businesses that depend on it, even as uncertainty remains.

Advocacy groups, including the Global Black Economic Forum, have made clear they plan to continue pressing the case. They see it as a defining moment, not just for one program, but for how states handle policies tied to opportunity and fairness.

As the case unfolds, its impact may stretch well beyond a single courtroom. At stake is not only the future of a decades-old program, but also a broader question: who gets to shape the rules—and how far that power can go before it crosses a line.