Lobato v. Colorado, No. 06CA0733 (Colo. App. Ct. Jan. 24, 2008)
The Colorado Court of Appeals has ruled that 14 school districts lacked legal standing to challenge the adequacy of the state’s school finance system and that the challenge by 47 parents addressed a nonjusticiable political question, i.e., one not capable of being decided by a court. The plaintiffs had argued that (1) the system violated the mandate of a "thorough and uniform" public education system under the state constitution’s Education Clause; (2) the state legislature imposed state education standards and instructional goals without ever determining whether sufficient financial resources exist to accomplish them; and (3) the system failed to provide sufficient funding to permit school districts to do so. A state trial court ruled that (1) the funding levels set forth in the constitution’s Amendment 23 were consistent with the Education Clause; (2) because the school finance system is in accord with Amendment 23, the claims were nonjusticiable; and (3) the school districts lacked standing.
The appellate court affirmed. Noting that political subdivisions of the state of Colorado lack standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute concerning their performance except when the constitution or a statute grants them the express or implied authority to file a civil action against the state, the court rejected the school districts’ assertion that this exception applied because the constitution’s Local Control Clause gives them a legally protected interest in controlling instruction in schools, including funding. The Local Control Clause, the court found, links control over instruction to locally raised funds, not to state funding. The court then determined sua sponte (of its own accord without a request from the parties) that the parents did have legal standing to bring the suit but went on to conclude that their claims were barred by the political question doctrine. The court declined to follow the majority rule among other states that challenges to school funding systems are justiciable, distinguishing from Colorado’s provisions the language of constitutions in other states whose courts have ruled on funding adequacy. Applying the justiciability factors set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 198 (1962), the court found that Colorado’s "thorough and uniform" language does not provide "manageable standards" for determining a qualitative educational guarantee. “We are cautioned by the experience of other courts that have held such challenges to be justiciable but then been unable to achieve prompt resolution,” the court added, citing the continuous litigation in some states.
Lobato v. Colorado, No. 06CA0733 (Colo. App. Ct. Jan. 24, 2008)
[Editor’s Note: Background, including the lower court’s ruling, is below.]
NSBA School Law pages on Lobato v. Colorado