Is any form of reparation for past racism in America an intractable problem?

Is it justified, or just more illegal discrimination, 

to try to make up for past discrimination?

An article in the New York Times highlights how hard, or maybe impossible, it is to try to equalize the playing field for minorities that have been discriminated against. Expressions of bitterness and resentment from Whites flow freely, along with accompanying lawsuits fighting against federal equalization efforts. The NYT writes:

LaGRANGE, Mo. — Shade Lewis had just come in from feeding his cows one sunny spring afternoon when he opened a letter that could change his life: The government was offering to pay off his $200,000 farm loan, part of a new debt relief program created by Democrats to help farmers who have endured generations of racial discrimination.

But the $4 billion fund has angered conservative white farmers who say they are being unfairly excluded because of their race. And it has plunged Mr. Lewis and other farmers of color into a new culture war over race, money and power in American farming.

The debt relief is redress set aside for what the government calls “socially disadvantaged farmers” — Black, Hispanic, Indigenous and other nonwhite workers who have endured a long history of discrimination, from violence and land theft in the Jim Crow South to banks and federal farm offices that refused them loans or government benefits that went to white farmers.

Now, raw conversations about discrimination in farming are unfolding at farmers’ markets and on rural social media channels where race is often an uncomfortable subject.

“It’s a bunch of crap,” said Jeffrey Lay, who grows corn and soybeans on 2,000 acres and is president of the county farm bureau. “They talk about they want to get rid of discrimination. But they’re not even thinking about the fact that they’re discriminating against us.”

Even in a county that is 94 percent white, Mr. Lay said the federal government’s renewed focus on helping farmers of color made him feel like he was losing ground, a sign to him of the country’s demographic shifts.

“I can’t afford to go buy that 5,000-acre piece of ground,” he said. “Shade Lewis, he’d qualify to get it. And that’s fine. That doesn’t bother me. But I can’t.”

Many farmers of color have welcomed the debt relief, which was tucked into the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief act, as well as even more ambitious measures proposed by Democrats to grant plots of up to 160 acres to Black farmers.

But rural residents upset with the repayments call them reverse racism.

White conservative farmers and ranchers from Florida, Texas and the Midwest quickly sued to block the program, arguing that the promised money amounts to illegal discrimination. America First Legal, a group run by the former Trump aide Stephen Miller, is backing the Texas lawsuit, whose plaintiff is the state’s agriculture commissioner.  

“It’s anti-white,” said Jon Stevens, one of five Midwestern farmers who filed a lawsuit through the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a conservative legal group. “Since when does Agriculture get into this kind of race politics?”

“We’re getting the short end,” said John Wesley Boyd Jr., a Virginia bean and grain farmer who is also founder of the National Black Farmers Association. “Anytime in the United States, if there’s money for Blacks, those groups speak up and say how unfair it is. But it’s not unfair when they’re spitting on you, when they’re calling you racial epithets, when they’re tearing up your application.”

The NYT points out that banks are opposing the fund, ostensibly fearing loss of interest income form loan defaults. White farmers have started their own "All Farmers Matter" movement. Lewis stated that banks in his area of Missouri scoffed at his requests for loans and federal farm agents refused to even speak to him. 

Clearly, some or most White farmers see no role for federal support targeted to any race. Presumably the reasoning is that past injustices either did not happen or that even if discrimination did happen in the past, that still does not justify targeting federal support based on race. The fact that discrimination is still happening appears to be lost on some or most White farmers. The two sides seems to be mostly polarizing and talking past each other.

Questions: Is past discrimination against black and other minority farmers (i) a myth, or (ii) not a myth, but also not adequate justification for federal support based on race?[1] Should the federal government never offer any help to any group or economic sector based on race based on past discrimination, e.g., because it amounts to unconstitutional discrimination against Whites? 

Footnote: 

1. The National Black Farmer Organization and public records indicate that discrimination against black farmers has existed for decades, including discrimination against Black farmers by federal farm agencies, e.g., the Department of Agriculture. One federal discrimination survey document written in 1965 included this: "(1) that in the CES [Cooperative Extension Service] many thousands of Negro farmers are denied access to services provided to white farmers which would help them to diversify, increase production, achieve adequate farming operations or train for off-farm employment; .... and  (4) that there were no Negroes among the almost 5,000 ASCS [Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service] county committeemen in 11 Southern States."