Columbia Falls Elementary School District No. 6 v. State of Montana, No. 04-390 (March 22, 2005)
The Montana Supreme Court has ruled that the state's system of funding public elementary and secondary education violates Article X, § 1(3) of the Montana Constitution, which states, "[t]he legislature shall provide a basic system of free quality public elementary and secondary schools." However, the court deferred to the state legislature for the definition of "quality" as used in the constitutional provision. The supreme court rejected the state's argument that the challenge to the adequacy of the state's school funding scheme presented a non-justiciable political question. It concluded that although Article X, § 1(3) was initially a non-self executing provision and as such a political question, once the legislature addressed the threshold political question by creating a system of public education, it became subject to judicial scrutiny. It stated, "As the final guardian and protector of the right to education, it is incumbent upon the court to assure that the system enacted by the Legislature enforces, protects and fulfills the right." Addressing the substantive question of whether the state's current system of funding meets its constitutional duty, the supreme court agreed with the trial court that "the findings demonstrate that whatever legitimate definition of quality that the Legislature may devise, the educational product of the present school system is constitutionally deficient and that the Legislature currently fails to adequately fund Montana's public school system." It also concluded that because the state legislature has failed to define what "quality" means, the court was unable to determine if the current funding system is designed to provide a "quality" education. As a result, the supreme court stated that it would "defer to the [l]egislature to provide a threshold definition of what the Public Schools Clause [Article X, § 1(3)] requires."
Columbia Falls Elementary School District No. 6 v. State of Montana, No. 04-390 (March 22, 2005)
[Link to full opinion][
Editor's Note: For background on the Montana case and information on reactions by Montana policymakers, see below. For more information and an NSBA brief on the question of justiciability, see the Legal Clips
item from last month on the Maryland school funding litigation.]
[NSBA School Law pages on preliminary order][BoardBuzz on final decision][NSBA School Law pages on Maryland case]