Meet the Plaintiffs of The HUB Case
These are business owners who built companies, hired employees, and competed fairly under a lawful framework.
Ruben Mercado, Jr: Ipsum General Contractors (Houston) – A Hispanic-owned construction firm whose long-term public contracting strategy was built around lawful HUB participation.
Tyrone Dixon: Mpulse Healthcare & Technology (Sugarland) – A Black-owned medical technology distributor actively pursuing state contracts when certification was revoked.
Cortena Williams: Williams Professional Water Restoration (Burleson) – A Black woman-owned restoration services company negotiating contracts when certification was stripped.
Ray Gutierrez: Houston Construction Services (Houston) – A Hispanic-owned contractor whose business development pipeline was directly disrupted.
Wendell Stemley, President of NAMC – Greater Houston Chapter – Representing more than 150 minority- and women-owned contractors statewide.
Today, the Global Black Economic Forum in partnership with Freedom Economy Business Association and American Pride Rises, announced the first affirmative litigation nationally brought in direct support of business owners harmed by coordinated attacks by state executive officials on minority business enterprise programs.
This case arises after the Texas State Comptroller issued regulations to strip more than 15,000 minority- and women-owned businesses of certification through emergency rulemaking, thereby restricting access to billions of dollars in public contracting.
The economic consequences are immediate and statewide. Businesses across Texas — from construction to healthcare to infrastructure — structured their growth around a legislatively enacted program that has existed for more than three decades.
Certifications were revoked without notice or hearing.
Active bids were halted.
Contracts were destabilized.
The Legislature recently rejected legislation that would have made this change.
Yet the State Comptroller has attempted to dismantle the program.
The HUB Case challenges that overreach.
Importantly, this is not an isolated dispute.
Across the country, business and contracting programs serving diverse communities are facing escalating legal and political attacks.
Until now, those challenges have largely been defensive.
This case represents the first major affirmative legal action brought on behalf of entrepreneurs whose economic survival is directly threatened by these policy shifts.
The ramifications extend beyond Texas.
When billions of dollars in public contracting can be restricted overnight, it affects statewide economic ecosystems, local job markets, public infrastructure delivery, and the reliability of government procurement systems.
At its core, this case address fundamental legal and economic issues:
Who has the authority to dismantle a legislatively enacted program?
What protections exist for businesses that relied on longstanding statutory frameworks?
And what happens to economic stability when those frameworks are abruptly reversed?
The People’s Davos is here. The Global Black Economic Forum is shaping the future of work, wealth, health, and democracy—centered on equity, action, and impact. In an era of misinformation and resistance, we’re advancing real solutions for systemic change. Thank you to Harvard Social Impact Review for highlighting our work.
Check out the full piece from @alphonsodavid in our bio.
Tomorrow night I’ll be joining the historic Cambridge Union overseas for a conversation that could not be more timely:
“This House Believes Modern LGBTQ+ Activism Fails Its Community.”
This debate is not about denying the extraordinary progress generations of LGBTQ+ people fought, bled, and organized to achieve. It is about asking whether the modern movement is fully meeting the urgency of this moment — materially, globally, and intersectionally.
At a time when Black trans women continue to face disproportionate violence, LGBTQ+ communities globally are confronting escalating political backlash, and economic insecurity remains deeply entrenched across queer and trans communities, we have to be willing to interrogate not just visibility, but outcomes.
Movements grow stronger when they are willing to confront difficult truths about power, priorities, and who gets left behind.
Grateful to engage this discussion alongside an accomplished panel of advocates, elected officials, and experts from across perspectives.
Thank you to the Cambridge Union for the invitation and for continuing a global tradition of rigorous debate and dialogue.
There is a real and measurable economic cost to taking political power away from people.
After Reconstruction, poll taxes and literacy tests were used across the South to suppress Black voters. The consequences did not stop at the ballot box. Research found Black working people lost at least 15% of their annual income while governments simultaneously invested less into Black communities through reduced public services and resources.
Put differently: when people lose political power, they often lose economic power too.
We still see versions of that cost today. A single federal election cycle produced an estimated $500 million in lost wages and time because people were forced to stand in excessively long voting lines just to cast a ballot.
These are not symbolic consequences.
In my latest commentary, I lay out why the Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais poses economic consequences that businesses cannot afford to ignore.
A judiciary willing to sever remedy from right is a judiciary that has put every statutory protection on notice.
Read the full piece in Contrarian News.
#icymi On yesterday’s episode of White House Wednesdays, president and CEO of @globalblackeconomicforum , @alphonsodavid broke down the implications of SCOTUS’ gutting of the voting rights act and the economic consequences of redistricting! Link to the full conversation on Amplified Voices @youtube and in our stories 👆🏽
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
#aurnonline #amplifiedvoicestv #votingrights #louisianavscallais
My thoughts on today’s Supreme Court ruling.
At a time when Black unemployment is rising and affordability is already out of reach for too many, the Court has made it harder to participate in democracy so each of us can challenge systems that shape who gets access to opportunity.
We are seeing a familiar pattern: rights barely remain on paper, but the ability to enforce them is weakened.
Yesterday, a Texas court blocked unlawful changes to the HUB program designed to widen economic pathways for minority- and women-owned businesses.
When executive branch oversteps, accountability from the courts keeps access to opportunity within reach.
Join the fight at the link in our bio.
We said it from day one: you cannot rewrite the law from the executive branch.
Today, the court agreed.
Today’s ruling affirms what we have argued all along: the Comptroller violated the law—and thousands of businesses should never have been put at risk.
The attempt to dismantle Texas’ HUB Program was unlawful—and blocked.
This is a win for the thousands of Black, Women, and Diverse owned businesses that were pushed out from the opportunity to compete.
Thank you to the incredible team of lawyers, legislators and partners we worked alongside to make this possible.
This is a victory for the rule of law. And we are just getting started.
The first hearing in the Texas HUB case is coming up Monday in Austin. The Global Black Economic Forum is suing to restore certification for women and diverse business owners and to hold the state accountable for illegally dismantling a program that has been around for over 30 years. Learn more about what’s at stake in this interview with @rolandsmartin
The Administration’s reported move to narrow enforcement of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act by eliminating disparate impact liability is a direct rollback of long-standing civil rights protections in lending.
Discrimination has never been limited to intent—it shows up in outcomes. Removing accountability for impact creates cover for inequity at a time when access to credit remains a critical barrier to entrepreneurship, homeownership, and wealth creation.
Weakening these protections doesn’t reduce risk—it shifts it onto the very communities the law was designed to protect.
Check out this interview with Esther Dillard featuring our President and CEO @alphonsodavid when this rule was first proposed.
/podcast/1248-black-information-network-89094154/episode/bin-exclusive-alphonso-david-sounds-alarm-on-proposed-fair-lending-changes-314447324
