Hispanics were occasionally lynched in Texas, even though there were notable Hispanic leaders throughout Texas history (such as Juan Seguin during the Texas Revolution).

Native Americans were systematically herded into reservations and forcibly Americanized, complete with physical, mental, and emotional abuse, with the Government attempting to destroy their culture. Outside of reservations, Native Americans were either curiosities or didn't advertise their differences. Also, Native Americans didn't gain US citizenship until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

San Francisco rioted in 1877, attacking Chinatown, killing 4 and causing over $100,000 in property damage. Asians were treated like crap, with Japan and the US creating a gentleman's agreement to keep Japanese out, and Chinese immigrants being treated as near slave labor on railroads. The Chinese Exclusion Act also prevented even children born to Chinese immigrants from claiming citizenship, something not overturned until United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). This means that they were not allowed to be naturalized citizens for over 30 years after blacks were universally considered such by law.

edit: Added note about Indian Citizenship Act.

You may be interested in our FAQ section on How were other minorities treated during the period of racial segregation in America?

First off, I'd like to emphasize the fact that Hispanic is not a race. This seems to be a common misconception in the US. It simply means someone from a Spanish speaking country. A white Irish person and a black Jamaican are both "Anglic" but they certainly don't belong to the same race! Similarly, a Danish Argentine and a black Dominican are both "Hispanic" but very different from a racial perspective.

As I said before the Spanish speaking world is extremely diverse. Spanish people (from Spain) were considered white in the South and the Canary Islander (Isleño) community is an important part of the White population of Louisiana. As they are Europeans and thus "white",they were unaffected by segregation in Louisiana. In fact, many Canary Islanders were staunch supporters of segregationist policies, the most notable example being Leander Perez, an important figure in the anti-desegregation movement.

Most hispanics in the US are of Mexican origin and are Mestizos, meaning that they are a mix of Amerindian and European (When people use "Hispanic in a racial sense. they are almost always referring to this group). They are the largest Hispanic group in the US and, owing to their mixed origins, have had varying experiences with segregationist policies and racism. Most Mexicans were legally classified as white but in some cases, their experiences overlapped with those of African Americans. Aside from the aforementioned Isleños, there were very few "hispanic" people in the South. In Texas and the West, however, there were attempts to segregate schools and separate (Mestizo) Mexican and White children. This lasted until court cases like Mendez v. Westminster (1946) ruled this separation unconstitutional. Mexicans also faced petty discrimination throughout the Southwest and, like Blacks is the South, were sometimes denied access to restaurants and other public places on the basis of their background.

Well, Native Americans didn't really spend a lot of time in heavily-populated areas. The US government spent much of their time from the early 1800s to the mid 1900s getting Native Americans away from the American settlers. Notable acts are the Indian Remocal Act in 1830, which let the US gvt make treaties with tribes to remove them from the traditional land base to remote, out-of-the-way reservations (remember the Trail of Tears in 1838?). In the later 1800s they began to try to assimilate/civilize American Indians through vocational training, forced (and totally racially segregated) boarding schools for Native youth, and even criminalizing traditional practices (via the Code of Indian Offenses, 1883). This kind of stuff continued well into the mid 1900s.

I think a large part of the difference between the treatment of blacks and that of American Indians is that most of the tribes were fighting for sovereignty from the US, not to be a part of it. Tribal sovereignty- the tribe's ability to govern themselves, based largely on the treaties they made in the past with the US gvt- was the guiding light for many of their resistance to policy and legal fights in the 1900s. This is why they didn't align themselves very closely with the African American fight for civil rights in the latter half of the 1900s, and could be an explanation as to why you don't see so much about separate facilities.

Source: a great intro book, Blood Struggle by Charles Wilkinson, which was the text for an intro class to Native American studies at my university, and super easy to read (and the source of the bulk of my knowledge on this topic began). If you want to read about academic segregation, I really enjoyed The Indian History of an American Institution: Native Americans and Dartmouth by Colin Calloway. An interesting take on current tribal sovereignty, with a comparison to the late 19th century, is High Stakes: Florida Seminole Gaming and Sovereignty by Jessica Cattelino.