Gov. Mike Braun on Wednesday directed the Indiana Department of Administration to stop enforcing race- and sex-based preferences in state contracting, acting on a formal opinion from Attorney General Todd Rokita that found key components of the state’s Minority and Women’s Business Enterprise program unconstitutional.
Rokita announced the opinion Wednesday morning, concluding that the program’s numerical spending goals, race- and sex-based certifications, subcontracting mandates and enforcement mechanisms all fail strict scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The opinion relies on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which Rokita said established that racial preference programs can rarely be justified.
“This blatantly illegal program singles out some Hoosiers for disfavored treatment purely because of their sex or the color of their skin, and it insults other Hoosiers by suggesting they cannot compete on a fair playing field,” Rokita said. “The program is both un-American and unconstitutional.”
Braun responded by directing the Department of Administration to discontinue what he called the unlawful portions of the program and replace them with a merit-based approach.
“Our Constitution mandates equal protection under the law, because a system where the government picks winners and losers on the basis of race or sex can never be fair,” Braun said. “Indiana has replaced divisive, politically-charged programs with a focus on Merit, Excellence, and Innovation: a level playing field where every single Hoosier has the chance to get ahead with hard work.”
Created by statute in 1983, the program required state agencies to set participation goals directing a minimum percentage of contract dollars to businesses owned by women or members of certain minority groups. Recent goals averaged 8% for minority-owned businesses and 10% for women-owned businesses. According to Rokita, contractors who missed those targets risked bid rejection, withheld payments, contract termination or debarment.
Department of Administration Commissioner Brandon Clifton requested the review in August 2025, citing Students for Fair Admissions and a 2025 U.S. Department of Justice memorandum. His request also asked whether the division remained obligated to complete a five-year disparity study required by statute and already past due. Neither Wednesday’s announcement nor the accompanying statements addressed how that question was answered.
Preferences for veteran-owned businesses remain lawful under the opinion. Rokita’s office said the department may adopt new, race- and sex-neutral preferences for veterans, small businesses and Indiana-based businesses, and that it will advise the agency on a transition and work with the General Assembly to repeal the underlying statute. Braun said he will announce a new small-business contracting program at a later date.
The opinion also concluded that the governor has authority to decline to implement statutes that clearly infringe constitutional rights.
That conclusion drew immediate objection from House Democrats. State Rep. Mitch Gore (D-Indianapolis) said the governor lacks the power to set aside duties the legislature imposed.
“The Governor has now chosen to dismantle that statutory framework based upon an advisory opinion from the Attorney General,” Gore said in a statement. “That is not how our constitutional system works. The Attorney General does not invalidate statutes. Governors do not repeal laws.”
Gore noted that Indiana Code 4-13-16.5 still directs the Governor’s Commission on Supplier Diversity to certify eligible businesses, set participation goals informed by disparity studies and report on the program’s effectiveness. He said Braun should seek an amendment from the General Assembly or make his constitutional argument in court.
Attorney general opinions are advisory and nonbinding. The statute remains in effect, and the announcements did not indicate whether the administrative rules implementing the program have been repealed through the state’s rulemaking process.
No litigation has been filed.
