smdifansmfjsmsnd t1_j2dz8e4 wrote
The state has lost twice in court already. I grew up in Claremont where they were the first to sue the state over educational funding and it was found back then the way educational funding is done in the state is unconstitutional. I’m no lawyer or constitutional expert but I don’t understand how the state has lost multiple times now and has pending lawsuits going on again and yet they’re not forced to make changes.
Loosh_03062 t1_j2e7a1p wrote
It's rather difficult for one branch of the state government to hold the other two in contempt; it's not like the Supreme Court can lock the General Court and governor in their respective spaces until everyone agrees on something which won't cause *someone* to head right back to a lawyer's office.
Also, with the Claremont decision the state is required to fund an adequate education but "adequate" was left undefined, leading to years of squabbles around how much this nebulous concept of adequacy costs and what adequacy is in the first place. Remember, the Supremes only declared the old funding method unusable, they didn't (and couldn't) dictate the whats and hows of any new method.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments