Education funding case started 30 years ago returns to North Carolina Supreme Court
RALEIGH, N.C. — A long-running education funding case is back in the North Carolina Supreme Court. It comes less than a year after a majority of the justices, all of them Democrats, agreed that taxpayer funds can be directed to closing education disparities across the state without explicit approval from lawmakers.
That structure has apparently changed to allow oral arguments scheduled for Thursday in the state Supreme Court. Days after the court's landmark 2022 ruling, registered Republicans won two seats in the statewide election, regaining a majority on the seven-member court.
In a partisan shift in effect, five Republican justices agreed last fall to consider additional arguments sought by Republican legislative leaders challenging the 2022 decision. These lawmakers argue that only the General Assembly can appropriate state funds.
The justices argued Thursday that Superior Court Judge James Ammons, who was assigned to oversee the nearly 30-year-old case, decided last spring that the state would have to pay $678 million to complete two years of eight years. They wrote that the question would be whether the court had the authority to issue an order declaring that the dollar amount was owed. -Program for the year.
But the legal brief submitted to Senate Majority Leader Phil Berger and House Speaker Tim Moore essentially aims to overturn a November 2022 ruling by the then-Democratic court. The actions of Ammons' predecessor, the late Judge David Lee, who approved the original $5.4 billion plan and ordered some of the taxpayer funds to be moved, will be the focus of the 2022 ruling. Ta.
Lawyers for the state Legislature argue that school districts across rural Hoke and Halifax counties must comply with the state constitution, which the Supreme Court upheld in 1997 and 2004, provides all children with an “opportunity to receive an education.” It states that there has never been a legal judgment that said the requirements that it had to meet were not met. Sound basic education. ” And lawyers argue that school funding decisions are political issues that the judiciary should avoid.
Many other legal parties, including some school districts, say Ammons' statewide order should be upheld and implemented. They argue that it is the judiciary's job to fix statewide constitutional deficiencies in K-12 education that the executive and legislative branches have failed to address.
Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper is not a party to the lawsuit, but supports implementing the plan his administration helped develop.
Lawyers supporting the plan, which includes funding in part to improve teacher recruitment and pay, expand preschool and support students with disabilities, said Moore and Berger is seeking to review the decision in 2022, but argues that procedurally, it is long past time to review the decision. Case.
The justices are unlikely to issue a ruling in court at the end of oral arguments. The court's next opinion date is March 22. The new Republican majority ruled in favor of Republican lawmakers by overturning previous redistricting decisions and upholding photo ID requirements for voters.
Education and civil rights advocates had scheduled a rally outside the Supreme Court building while the case was being heard.
The case began in 1994, when several school districts and the children's families sued, alleging violations of state law and the Constitution. The issue is often referred to as “Leandro,” after the last name of one of the students who filed the lawsuit.
In repeated requests from the 2022 lawsuit, lawyers for the school district have asked Associate Judge Phil Berger Jr., son of the Senate majority leader, to recuse himself from the case, while lawyers for Mr. Berger and Mr. Moore have asked Associate Judge Anita Earls to recuse himself from the case. asked not to participate. . This year's no motion was expected to fail, as it did in 2022, with Earls, a registered Democrat, and Berger, a younger Republican, expected to weigh in on Thursday.
