The proposed brief asks a question that deserves greater attention: What are the economic consequences of enjoining NMSDC's Minority Business Enterprise certification program?
The brief does not attempt to resolve the legal issues before the Court. Instead, it examines the potential effects of disrupting a major supplier-certification system on GDP, employment, wages, procurement costs, competition, business formation, tax revenues, and long-term market efficiency.
Certification Has an Economic Function
Supplier certification is more than an administrative designation. It can reduce information asymmetry, supplier-search costs, verification expenses, and contracting uncertainty.
The brief draws on the seminal economic work of Gary Becker on discrimination; George Akerlof, Michael Spence, and Joseph Stiglitz on information asymmetry and signaling; and Ronald Coase and Oliver Williamson on transaction costs and institutions. The question is straightforward:
If an institution reduces information costs, facilitates transactions, and helps qualified suppliers enter procurement markets, what happens when that institution is disrupted?
Potential Economic Consequences
Using approximately $567 billion in annual certified-MBE revenue as the analytical base, the proposed brief considers several disruption scenarios. Under the central 5 percent scenario, approximately $28.35 billion in direct supplier revenue would be at risk. The model estimates potential annual effects of approximately:
$45.36 billion in total economic output
$22.61 billion in GDP/value added
185,000 jobs
More than $12 billion in labor income
More than $1 billion in additional procurement costs
These are estimates—not predictions. Their purpose is to demonstrate that the economic consequences of disrupting certification cannot reasonably be assumed to be zero.
Competition and Entrepreneurship Matter
Certification can also help smaller businesses compete against established suppliers with greater resources, brand recognition, and longstanding purchasing relationships.
That matters for minority businesses because access to customers and contracts is directly connected to business formation, scaling, employment, and wealth creation.
Our previous research on the racial wealth gap demonstrates why these questions have broader economic significance. America's Racial Wealth Gap in 8 Graphs
The argument also reflects an economic principle discussed in our earlier examination of Martin Luther King Jr.'s economic philosophy: discrimination does not impose costs solely on those directly affected. By preventing the efficient deployment of human and business capital, discrimination can reduce the productive capacity of the broader economy. Martin Luther King's Philosophy on Investing
Economics Should Be Part of the Conversation
An economic benefit cannot make an unlawful practice lawful. But when broad injunctive relief could affect thousands of businesses, workers, purchasers, and communities, its economic consequences deserve careful consideration.
I encourage economists, legal scholars, chambers of commerce, business organizations, procurement professionals, and researchers to examine this case and independently assess its broader implications.
The legal questions will be decided by the Court.
But the economics should be part of the conversation.