Filed Date: July 17, 1970
Closed Date: Aug. 5, 2025
Clearinghouse coding complete
This was a lawsuit challenging the operation of a dual school system based on race in Hendry County, Florida. Originally filed on July 17, 1970, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, proceedings in the case included a preliminary order, in 1970, requiring conversion from a dual to a unitary school system, a permanent injunction, issued in 1975, prohibiting operation of a dual school system and requiring the district to take certain actions to prevent segregation and to ensure non-discrimination in student assignment, staffing, transportation, school construction and site selection, inter-district transfers, and other programs. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the 1975 injunction.
In July 1970, the United States filed suit to desegregate Hendry County public schools. By August 1971, the district implemented a unitary system where all students of a specific grade attended the same school. In the Clewiston area, grades 1–5 attended Clewiston Elementary, while the formerly all-Black Harlem Academy was utilized for kindergarten, special education, and administrative offices.
In 1973, a state survey deemed Clewiston Elementary overcrowded and unsafe, prompting the School Board to propose building a new elementary school. The proposed site was located on land donated by the United States Sugar Corporation, adjacent to the existing Middle School and roughly equidistant between the Black and White communities. Intervening plaintiffs (Harlem Civic Improvement Association) objected, arguing that the Board should instead renovate Harlem Academy to house the elementary grades. They contended that new construction would burden Black students with unequal transportation and was motivated by a refusal to bus White children into the Black community.
The district court applied the standard established in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education 402 U.S. 1 (1971), which mandates that in a former dual system, school construction must not serve to perpetuate or re-establish segregation. To determine if the new construction was constitutionally permissible, the district court applied an eleven-factor test, considering: (1) population growth; (2) finances; (3) land values; (4) site availability; (5) racial composition of the student body; (6) neighborhood racial composition; (7) capacity of existing facilities; (8) transportation requirements; (9) equality of bussing burdens; (10) state recommendations; and (11) potential for future re-segregation. 373 F.Supp. 92.
The district court found that Clewiston Elementary was totally inadequate for its enrollment of 1,044 students, exceeding its capacity of 960. The court rejected the plaintiffs' proposal to renovate Harlem Academy, noting that renovation costs were prohibitive (estimated over $238,000 plus inflation) and the facility suffered from structural deficiencies. Furthermore, using Harlem Academy for elementary grades would displace the integrated kindergarten and special education programs currently housed there, with no alternative facilities available. 373 F.Supp. 92.
Regarding the location, the district court found, and the Fifth Circuit agreed, the proposed site "ideal" because it was centrally located and virtually equidistant from the centers of both Black and White communities. The courts determined that the location would not increase the transportation burden; in fact, it would place many Black students closer to their school than before. To ensure equity, the district court ordered the Board to provide free transportation to all students within a two-mile radius.
The district court granted the School Board's motion to construct the new school, finding the plan constitutionally permissible and educationally sound. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, holding that the District Court did not abuse its discretion. 504 F.2d 550
Upon appeal where intervening plaintiffs contested the new plan would not adequately integrate and require more bussing of black students than white students, the Fifth Circuit disagreed. The Fifth Circuit held that the school system remained unitary under the new plan and did not require further adjustment by the district court or the school district. 504 F.2d 550.
In 2017, the court granted the parties’ joint motion seeking declaration of partial unitary status, related to student assignment between schools, transportation, facilities, and extracurricular activities, and entered an order directing the district to comply with the parties' stipulation. In 2021, the court did the same as to faculty and staff recruiting.
On July 23, 2025, the parties stipulated to dismissal of the action with prejudice, agreeing that the district was unitary with respect to the remaining areas of compliance -- within-school segregation related to student discipline -- and that it had implemented the provisions of the 2021 stipulation and demonstrated full and good faith compliance for a reasonable period.
On August 5, 2025, the court closed the case, dismissing it with prejudice.
Summary Authors
Jack Moore (11/13/2025)
United States of America v. State of Mississippi, Southern District of Mississippi (1970)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5736015/parties/united-states-v-hendry-county-school-district/
Moreno, Federico A. (Florida)
AUSA, Noticing Non (Florida)
Feaman, Peter Marshall (Florida)
Hamilton, Andrea E. (Florida)
Harrell-James, Veronica Vanessa (Florida)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5736015/united-states-v-hendry-county-school-district/
Last updated Dec. 8, 2025, 3:17 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations Involving the Government
Trump Administration 2.0: Reversing Course on Existing Litigation
Key Dates
Filing Date: July 17, 1970
Closing Date: Aug. 5, 2025
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
The United States of America
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Attorney Organizations:
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Hendry County School District (Hendry), School District
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Title IV, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000c et seq.
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
Southern District of Florida 1:70-cv-01069
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 74-02400
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Mixed
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Order Duration: 1975 - 2025
Issues
General/Misc.: