•  
  •  
 

University of New Hampshire Law Review

Abstract

[Excerpt] "Court decisions involving the adequacy of public education raise some obvious separation of powers problems. These include the institutional competency of courts to determine what level of education is adequate and how much funding is necessary to reach that level, and the authority of courts to enforce such judgments. This article will examine these problems through New Hampshire’s serial education funding litigation, the Claremont case. [. . .] I will start by briefly reviewing the history of education funding litigation because this context is essential to understanding the Claremont case.9 I will then undertake a limited review of the Claremont case. Finally, I will consider Claremont from the standpoint of the separation of powers. I begin by examining the text and structure of the State Constitution and then consider whether there are judicially discoverable and manageable standards for determining what level of education is adequate and how much funding is necessary to reach that level. Because there is a textually demonstrable commitment of education funding and education policy to the legislative branch, and because what an adequate education comprises and costs are quintessentially political questions, Claremont represents a clear trespass on legislative powers and should be overruled.”

Repository Citation

Edward C. Mosca, New Hampshire’s Claremont Case and the Separation of Powers, 4 PIERCE L. REV. 409 (2006). Available at http://scholars.unh.edu/unh_lr/vol4/iss3/4

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS