Biden faces a dilemma, and White House plans to take the safer option. The question is: In crafting a policy on environment, should racism be stressed explicitly? During the campaign and as president, Biden has spoken of the disproportionate burden that minorities, especially Blacks, carry when it comes to environmental problems, as shown by research. However, in fine-tuning his environmental policy to racial equity, he would face legal challenges. So, the safe bet is to do what is needed – but in a color-blind way.

Within days of entering office, Biden had announced a ‘Justice40 Initiative’ (https://www.transportation.gov/equity-Justice40) to deliver 40% of the overall benefits of relevant federal investments to disadvantaged communities, which were meant to be identified on the race parameter too: https://www.npr.org/2021/01/29/956012329/hope-and-skepticism-as-biden-promises-to-address-environmental-racism

Now, Brenda Mallory, chairwoman of the White House Council of Environmental Quality that is designing the new environmental policy, says they are trying to set up a framework that will survive and yet also help people mitigate impacts. “I feel that we can do that based on race-neutral criteria”: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/15/climate/biden-environment-race-pollution.html

It’s tricky but can be done employing non-racial demographic criteria (income, joblessness, air pollution levels) to identify towns and neighborhoods that need support.

The new compromise approach on environment can be a trend-setter for other sectors too amid a debate on the role of race in public policy.

Last year, when Biden wanted to forgive loan payments for ‘socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers’ – as part of a $4 billion initiative to address centuries of racial injustice in farming (https://www.usda.gov/partnerships/socially-disadvantaged-farmers-and-ranchers), a lower court blocked the effort following a challenge from a white farmer: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/437873-federal-judge-halts-aid-to-minority-farmers/

The Supreme Court is going to hear a case challenging the use of race as a factor in college admissions: https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2022-01-24/supreme-court-to-revisit-race-based-college-admissions Given its conservative majority, the 40-year-old precedent may be reversed.

Apart from the courts, there are political reasons too in this year of mid-term elections. As Republicans seem to capitalize on the apparent grievances of the majority community, Democrats are hesitant in outright backing the other side – except in carefully selected gestures like the pledge of nominating the first Black woman to the Supreme Court: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-stands-pledge-nominate-black-woman-supreme-court/story?id=82487044

Also see:
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/advancing-equity-review-of-the-biden-administrations-efforts-in-its-first-year-to-implement-a-racial-equity-agenda/