What did the Sixth Circuit decide in the USDA case?

The court held the Tennessee farmer was not a prevailing party and could not recover attorney fees after Congress repealed the targeted program. Without a court-ordered change, fee recovery under the Equal Access Act framework failed. The decision narrows fee exposure when legislative action moots disputes over debt relief.

Does this ruling end USDA debt relief programs?

No. The ruling addresses attorney fee eligibility, not program legality. It says plaintiffs are unlikely to recover fees if Congress repeals a program before a judgment. USDA may still run or revise assistance programs, but litigants must secure court orders to preserve fee rights tied to debt relief challenges.

How does the Equal Access Act affect fee requests now?

Claimants generally need a court order that changes the legal relationship to qualify as prevailing parties. If Congress repeals a program, that often defeats fee claims. After this decision, fee petitions tied to mooted USDA debt relief lawsuits face higher hurdles unless plaintiffs win enforceable, merits-based relief.

What should farm lenders and producers do next?

Plan for policy changes without assuming fee recovery. Build contingencies if expected debt relief is litigated, document eligibility, and engage FSA promptly. Consider early motions that seek enforceable orders. Lenders should adjust underwriting where repayment depends on policy-linked credits or timing that could shift due to legislative action.

Law and Government

February 12: Sixth Circuit Nixes Fees in USDA Farmer Debt-Relief Case

ByDanny Kontos February 12, 2026

On February 12, the Sixth Circuit issued a key decision on debt relief litigation involving USDA’s repealed program. A Tennessee farmer who sued over USDA debt relief was denied attorney fees because Congress ended the program before a final judgment. The court held he was not a prevailing party under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The ruling trims government fee risk in similar cases and could shape future targeted relief designs. For investors in ag finance, farm equipment, and rural banks, the decision affects expectations around policy reversals and legal cost exposure.