Connecticut Plaintiffs File Appeal

The Connecticut Supreme Court has agreed to give expedited consideration to Plaintiffs’ appeal of the Superior Court’s dismissal last September of the adequacy claims in Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding v. Rell. The complaint included both equity and adequacy claims; the lower court’s order would permit the equity claims, but not the adequacy claims, to proceed to trial.

Upholding equity claims in a previous decision, Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn 615 (1977), the Connecticut Supreme court held that education is a fundamental right under the state constitution. The Connecticut Supreme Court also held that article eighth § 1 of the Connecticut Constitution, which declares that “[t]here shall always be free public elementary and secondary schools in the state” creates an “affirmative constitutional obligation.” Sheff v. O’Neill, 238 Conn 1,25 ( 1996). Based on these precedents, plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that the “affirmative obligation” under Article eighth § 1 includes an obligation to prepare students to obtain gainful employment, participate fully in our democracy, advance to higher education, and meet state standards.

Rather than allowing plaintiffs to produce evidence substantiating these allegations at trial, the Superior Court held that the allegations were “legal conclusions,” which, if accepted would constitute “an intrusion by the court into the constitutional prerogatives of other branches of state government.” The vast majority of courts in other states that have considered adequacy claims have held that judicial review is appropriate because, as the Montana Supreme Court recently put it, “[a]s 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.” Columbia Falls Elementary Sch. Dist. No. 6 v. State, 109 P.3d 357 ( Mont. 2005).

The Campaign for Educational Equity, Teachers College, Columbia University, the National Access Network, and the Education Law Center submitted a brief amicus curiae which provides a national overview of adequacy cases and documents how courts can work effectively with the legislative and executive branches to devise practical and successful remedies in education adequacy cases. An oral argument before the Connecticut Supreme Court is expected to take place in March.

Prepared by Michael A. Rebell, January 8, 2008