U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle dismissed a class-action lawsuit that accused the state of Florida for discriminating against Florida A&M University. In a 29-page report, Hinkle decided there wasn't enough evidence of “de jure” segregation: discrimination sanctioned by the law.

The Florida A&M plaintiffs used two key points in their discrimination case, according to Jim Saunders of the South Florida Sun Sentinel. Their first point of contention was the evident lack of funding compared to other state universities. Judge Hinkle, however, disagreed with the accusation.

Apparently, the 12 state schools in Florida agreed on a funding formula in 2014. The judge believed that the formula itself “is facially neutral, relying on measurable criteria including such things as retention and graduation rates and employment results.” In this case, he believed there was no intentional segregation built into the law.

Article Continues Below

The second case the plaintiffs used was the lack of unique academic programs. They felt that FAMU didn't have enough highly coveted individual programs to separate itself from the other schools. Hinkle also disagreed with that notion.

“The plaintiffs complain that FAMU has too few unique, high-demand programs – programs not available at any of the 11 other state universities,” he wrote. “But asked at oral argument for an example of any program FAMU is lacking – any program the plaintiffs assert FAMU does not offer today because of the prior de jure segregation or current intentional discrimination – the plaintiffs could come up with none. FSU [Florida State] and UF [the University of Florida] have larger student bodies than FAMU and offer more courses, but the … complaint alleges no facts that would support a finding that this is traceable to de jure segregation or intentional racial discrimination.”