A Decades-Long Legal Battle in Oklahoma Ends in Disappointment

The plaintiffs, Lessie Benningfield Randle and Viola Fletcher, both centenarians, sought restitution for the devastation of their community, Greenwood.

However, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s ruling, stating that while the grievances were legitimate, they did not fall under the public nuisance statute.

Known as “Black Wall Street,” it was one of the most affluent Black communities in the country, showcasing Black entrepreneurship and prosperity.

The accusation, though unsubstantiated, was enough to ignite racial tensions and lead to devastating violence against the Black community.

These headlines played a significant role in inciting the white mob that would eventually descend on Greenwood.

White pilots flew over the neighborhood, dropping dynamite from airplanes, marking one of the first aerial bombings in U.S. history. The community was completely devastated in a matter of hours.

The aftermath also saw mass arrests of Black residents, who were only released with white sponsors.

These actions further entrenched the damage done by the massacre.

She remembered “seeing airplanes flying, and a messenger going through the neighborhood telling all the Black people to leave town,” highlighting the terror inflicted on the community.

They argued that expanding public nuisance liability to historical injustices could create “unlimited and unprincipled” liability, which the court was not willing to endorse.

It showcases a prime example of the ongoing struggle for reparations and justice for communities impacted by past atrocities.

While their grievances were technically acknowledged, the legal path for reparations remains unresolved, reflecting the broader challenges of addressing historical injustices today.