Students and alumni of Lincoln University are demanding nearly $549 million from Missouri, alleging decades of unequal state funding left the historically Black university struggling with deteriorating buildings, limited resources, and missed educational opportunities.
The Lincoln University lawsuit, filed Wednesday, October 7, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, accuses state officials of violating federal civil rights protections by providing unequal financial support to Lincoln and the predominantly white University of Missouri.
According to Reuters, seven current and former Lincoln University students brought the case, alleging violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The plaintiffs argue that the state’s funding practices harmed their education, financial stability, and professional opportunities.
The financial allegations are backed by a federal analysis that predates the lawsuit.
In September 2023, the U.S. Departments of Education and Agriculture identified significant funding disparities between historically Black land-grant universities and their predominantly white counterparts. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, federal officials examined state funding per student from 1987 through 2020 and determined that historically Black land-grant institutions across 16 states had experienced more than $12 billion in funding disparities.
For Lincoln University specifically, the federal analysis identified a $361,569,760 shortfall in state appropriations compared with the University of Missouri over that period.
The Lincoln University lawsuit seeks substantially more than that original calculation. According to St. Louis Public Radio’s reporting published by The St. Louis American, the plaintiffs are requesting a court-supervised remediation fund totaling $548,753,438. Their calculation consists of $223,780,941 in historical funding shortfalls measured in the dollars of the years involved, plus $324,972,497 in requested prejudgment interest.
Those figures represent the plaintiffs’ proposed financial remedy, not a damages award or a court finding that Missouri owes the money.
A central allegation involves the state’s failure to provide matching funds for federal agricultural research and extension programs.
Under federal funding rules, states generally must provide matching contributions to help eligible land grant universities receive their full federal allocations. However, the Lincoln University lawsuit alleges Missouri failed to provide any designated state matching funds for Lincoln from fiscal years 2000 through 2007.
According to the Missouri Independent, the complaint states that Missouri provided only 11% to 51% of the required match between 2008 and 2021. To secure federal funding for its agricultural programs, Lincoln allegedly diverted approximately $43.5 million from its general operating budget between 2000 and 2016.
Attorneys described the financial consequences in the complaint, writing, “It forced Lincoln to cannibalize its own core institutional operating budget to survive.”
The lawsuit argues that money intended for broader university operations was redirected to cover obligations the state should have funded. According to Reuters, Lincoln also returned nearly $8 million in available federal funding between 2016 and 2018 when it could not satisfy matching requirements.
Plaintiffs contend that these financial decisions contributed to delayed building maintenance, inadequate student services, and fewer academic resources.
Their complaints extend beyond university accounting.
According to the Missouri Independent’s review of the lawsuit, former student Makhi Joseph Berinyuy Jaff documented troubling conditions in Perry Hall while attending Lincoln during 2023 and 2024. His materials described plumbing problems, including burst pipes that allegedly exposed students to sewage and unpleasant conditions inside the residence hall.
Another plaintiff, Jaydan Monee Ware, described concerns about dirty ventilation in her dormitory and respiratory symptoms she said developed after moving in. Other students alleged inadequate dining services forced them to spend additional money on meals.
These are allegations presented by students as evidence of their experiences. The court has not determined whether the claimed conditions resulted from unlawful state funding decisions.
The Lincoln University lawsuit also includes complaints from graduates whose experiences go back decades.
In an interview with the Associated Press, alumnus Herbert Kitchen recalled frequently going without heat and hot water while living in campus housing during the 1980s. He also expressed concerns that perceptions of Lincoln’s resources affected how employers valued his degree.
Kitchen’s connection to the university runs especially deep. According to the AP, his great-great-grandfather, Caleb Lindsey, was among the Black soldiers whose financial contributions helped establish the institution.
Lincoln University traces its origins to formerly enslaved Black soldiers who invested their own earnings into creating educational opportunities after the Civil War.
According to Lincoln University’s official history, members of the 62nd United States Colored Infantry contributed $5,000 toward establishing Lincoln Institute in Jefferson City. Soldiers from the 65th United States Colored Infantry added another $1,400. The institution officially opened on September 17, 1866, with just two students.
Lincoln became a public institution in 1879 and received federal land grant designation under the Second Morrill Act of 1890.
That designation is essential to understanding the present dispute.
The original Morrill Act of 1862 helped establish public universities focused on agriculture, engineering, and other practical subjects. However, Black students were excluded from many of those institutions under segregation.
The Second Morrill Act of 1890 required states receiving certain federal educational funds to admit students regardless of race or provide separate institutions for Black students with an equitable distribution of support.
Missouri designated Lincoln as its historically Black land grant institution while the University of Missouri retained its position as the state’s original land grant university.
More than a century later, the Lincoln University lawsuit alleges that the state’s unequal treatment continued through modern funding policies.
According to the Missouri Independent, attorneys also challenge a performance funding formula adopted in 2012. They argue that Lincoln’s state land grant support became subject to performance conditions, while comparable funding for the University of Missouri did not face those same requirements.
The complaint describes that distinction as part of a discriminatory system that imposed additional financial hurdles on the historically Black institution.
Still, Missouri has made changes to its funding practices in recent years.
In 2022, state lawmakers approved a full matching appropriation for Lincoln’s federal land grant funding after years of inadequate contributions. The development followed efforts by university leaders and legislators to address the disparity.
In a January 2025 announcement, Lincoln University confirmed that it received the full state match for the 2024 to 2025 fiscal year. The university acknowledged that previous state appropriations had fallen short, noting that in 2021 it received approximately $4.9 million of the $9.75 million required for a complete match.
The institution said the newer funding supported cooperative extension programs, research, and educational opportunities.
But the lawsuit argues that recent improvements do not compensate students and the university for resources lost during previous decades.
The alleged consequences could be substantial. In earlier reporting from the Missouri Independent, Lincoln University President John Moseley estimated in 2023 that addressing necessary campus building repairs would cost approximately $87 million.
The plaintiffs want financial relief to address the historical disparities and a permanent legal requirement preventing similar funding practices in the future.
The case is also part of a broader national effort.
The lawsuit was organized through the 1890 Project, an initiative led by attorney and former Missouri lawmaker Donald Calloway Jr. According to the Associated Press, the group intends to pursue negotiations and potential litigation in additional states where historically Black land grant universities experienced documented funding disparities.
The federal government’s 2023 analysis identified inequities in 16 states, while Delaware and Ohio were the only states examined that had provided equitable funding to their respective Black land-grant institutions.
Other states have faced significant litigation over the treatment of their public HBCUs.
Maryland, for example, reached a $577 million settlement in 2021 following a lengthy dispute involving its four public historically Black colleges and universities. According to Maryland’s official legislative records, the agreement established additional funding to be distributed over 10 years. That case involved different allegations, including the duplication of academic programs that maintained segregation’s effects.
Missouri’s litigation now raises a separate question about federal land grant obligations and financial accountability.
As of October 8, 2026, no court has ruled that Missouri is liable for the alleged discrimination or the amount sought. Reuters reported that the University of Missouri declined to comment because of ongoing litigation. Lincoln University itself is not a plaintiff in the case, and its representatives also declined to comment, according to St. Louis Public Radio.
Beyond the requested financial compensation, the plaintiffs are seeking long-term protections requiring Missouri to fully match Lincoln’s federal land grant funding and prevent future disparities.
The Lincoln University lawsuit now puts decades of state funding decisions before a federal court, with students and alumni seeking both financial restitution for the university’s alleged losses and enforceable protections for the generations who will attend it next.
