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.