Three Key Takeaways
- Missouri faces a separate $548.7 million lawsuit. Students and alumni of Lincoln University allege decades of unequal state funding, including failures to provide required matching funds for federal land-grant support.
- The case could strengthen scrutiny of how states fund public HBCUs. Although the lawsuit concerns Missouri, its allegations raise broader questions about disparities in state appropriations, research funding, infrastructure and institutional opportunity.
- FAMU could face renewed questions about funding equity. As Florida’s public land-grant HBCU, FAMU operates within a state university system in which funding formulas, research investments and performance-based allocations can have significant consequences for historically underserved institutions.
A $548.7 million lawsuit accusing Missouri of decades of discriminatory underfunding at Lincoln University is bringing renewed attention to a legal fight already underway at FAMU, where six students are challenging the state's treatment of its only public historically Black university.
The cases, filed in separate states, raise a central question about public higher education: Have states provided historically Black land-grant universities with equitable financial support, or have funding decisions perpetuated disparities rooted in segregation?
For FAMU, that question has taken on new significance. On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit revived a lawsuit that a federal judge had dismissed in January 2024, allowing the students' claims to proceed. The appeals court did not find that Florida discriminated against FAMU. It ruled that the lower court had improperly evaluated the allegations at the dismissal stage.
The Missouri lawsuit, filed Oct. 7, seeks compensation for alleged funding disparities at Lincoln University, the state's historically Black land-grant institution. Together, the cases could intensify scrutiny of how states distribute public funding, support research and maintain the institutions entrusted with expanding educational opportunity for Black Americans.
The plaintiffs cite a 2023 federal estimate that Missouri underfunded Lincoln by $361.6 million between 1987 and 2020. The larger lawsuit demand includes additional compensation and interest, according to Inside Higher Ed.
The complaint alleges that Missouri provided no state matching funds for Lincoln's federal land-grant allocations from fiscal 2000 through 2007 and only partial support in subsequent years.
Lincoln allegedly diverted about $43.5 million from its operating budget between 2000 and 2016 to cover the shortfall. When the university could no longer afford to do so, it forfeited nearly $8 million in federal funding from 2016 through 2018, the complaint says.
The plaintiffs contend that the missing resources could have supported campus repairs, faculty hiring, student services, financial aid and agricultural research. Missouri began providing the full state match in 2022, according to the allegations.
The Second Morrill Act of 1890 expanded the land-grant system in states that maintained segregated higher education, helping establish a network of institutions that became central to Black education, agricultural research and scientific advancement.
The funding issue is especially consequential because state support can determine whether universities have the resources to maintain facilities, recruit researchers and compete for federal grants. When states fail to provide required matching funds, institutions may have to redirect operating money or forgo federal allocations.
The FAMU students allege that Florida matched only about half or less of the university's federal land-grant funding, on average, between 2011 and 2022, producing a $24.4 million shortfall and over $1.3 billion since the late 80s. However, a recent study by the federal government estimates that FAMU is owed nearly $2 billion.
The Missouri case presents a similar concern about state matching support, but its claims and requested remedies differ from those in the FAMU litigation. The Missouri plaintiffs seek monetary damages and an injunction requiring full future matching support. The FAMU students are pursuing relief tied to their allegations that Florida has failed to remedy the continuing effects of segregation.
At FAMU, the litigation places particular attention on Florida's performance-based funding system, which ties state allocations to institutional outcomes. The students argue that the system's application, combined with longstanding resource disparities, has disadvantaged the university.
That concern does not, by itself, establish discrimination. The court must determine whether the specific policies and practices challenged by the students violate federal law.
Missouri lawsuit may add momentum to calls for transparent comparisons of state appropriations, land-grant matching funds, facilities spending and research investment at public HBCUs.
The question now before the courts is not simply whether public HBCUs need more funding. It is whether the states responsible for supporting them have met their legal obligations — and whether disparities that persist today are connected to the unequal system those institutions were created to overcome.