2008.01.24 - Lobato v. People - 216 P.3d 29-1

User Name: Julianna Wade
Date and Time: Dec 18, 2015
11:55 p.m. EST
Job Number: 27306079
Document(1)
1.
Lobato v. People, 216 P.3d 29

Client/Matter: TABOR
Content Type
Cases
Narrowed by
Court: Colorado
| About LexisNexis | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Copyright 2015 | LexisNexis.
Julianna Wade
| Warning
As of: December 18, 2015 11:55 PM EST
Lobato v. People
Court of Appeals of Colorado, Division Four
January 24, 2008, Decided
Court of Appeals No. 06CA0733
Reporter
216 P.3d 29; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69; 2008 WL 8920047
Anthony Lobato, as an individual and as parent and

natural guardian of Taylor Lobato and Alexa Lobato;
Denise Lobato, as an individual and as parent and
natural guardian of Taylor Lobato and Alexa Lobato;
Jaime Hurtado and Coralee Hurtado, as individuals and
as parents and natural guardians of Maria Hurtado and
Evan Hurtado; Janet L. Kuntz, as an individual and as
parent and natural guardian of Daniel Kuntz and Stacey
Kuntz; Pantaleon Villagomez and Maria Villagomez, as
individuals and as parents and natural guardians of
Chris Villagomez, Monique Villagomez and Angel
Villagomez; Linda Warsh, as an individual and as parent
and natural guardian of Adam Warsh, Karen Warsh and
Ashley Warsh; Elaine Gerdin, as an individual and as
parent and natural guardian of N.T., J.G. and N.G.;
Dawn Hartung, as an individual and as parent and
natural guardian of Q.H.; Paul Lastrella, as an individual
and as parent and natural guardian of B.L.; Woodrow
Longmire, as an individual and as parent and natural
guardian of Tianna Longmire; Steve Seibert and Dana
Seibert, as individuals and as parents and natural
guardians of Rebecca Seibert and Andrew Seibert;
Olivia Wright, as an individual and as parent and natural
guardian of A.E. and M.E.; Herbert Conboy and Victoria
Conboy, as individuals and as parents and natural
guardians of Tabitha Conboy and Timothy Conboy;
Terry Hart, as an individual and as parent and natural
guardian of Katherine Hart; Larry Howe-Kerr and Kathy
Howe-Kerr, as individuals and as parents and natural
guardians of Lauren Howe-Kerr and Luke Howe-Kerr;
John T. Lane, as an individual; Jennifer Pate, as an
individual and as parent and natural guardian of Ethan
Pate and Evelyn Pate; Robert L. Podio and Blanche J.
Podio, as individuals and as parents and natural
guardians of Robert Podio and Samantha Podio; Tami
Quandt, as an individual and as parent and natural
guardian of Brianna Quandt, Cody Quandt and Levi
Quandt; Brenda Christian, as an individual and as parent
and natural guardian of Ryan Christian; Toni L. McPeek,
as an individual and as parent and natural guardian of
M.J. McPeek, Cassie McPeek and Michael McPeek;
Christine Tiemann, as an individual and as parent and

natural guardian of Emily Tiemann and Zachary
Tiemann; Paula VanBeek, as an individual and as parent
and natural guardian of Kara VanBeek and Antonius
VanBeek; Larry Haller and Pennie Haller, as individuals
and as parents and natural guardians of Kelly Haller
and Brandy Haller; Tim Hunt and Sabrina Hunt, as
Shannon Moore-Hiner, Eris Moore, Darean Hunt and
Jeffrey Hunt; Mike McCaleb and Julie McCaleb, as
Rebekka McCaleb, Layne McCaleb and Lynde
McCaleb; Todd Thompson and Judy Thompson, as
Garson Thompson and Tarek Thompson; Doug Vondy
and Denise Vondy, as individuals and as parents and
natural guardians of Kyle Leaf and Hannah Vondy; Brad
Weisensee and Traci Weisensee, as individuals and as
parents and natural guardians of Joseph Weisensee,
Anna Weisensee, Amy Weisensee and Elijah
Weisensee; Stephen Topping, as an individual and as
parent and natural guardian of Michael Topping; Donna
Wilson, as an individual and as parent and natural
guardian of Ari Wilson, Sarah Patterson, Madelyn
Patterson and Taren Wilson-Patterson; David Maes, as
an individual and as parent and natural guardian of
Cherie Maes; Debbie Gould, as an individual and as
parent and natural guardian of Hannah Gould, Ben
Gould and Daniel Gould; Lillian Leroux, as an individual
and natural guardian of Ari Leroux, Lillian Leroux, Ashley
Leroux, Alexandria Leroux and Amber Leroux; Theresa
Wrangham, as an individual and natural guardian of
Rachel Wrangham and Deanna Wrangham; Alamosa
School District, No. RE-11J; Centennial School District
No. R-1; Center Consolidated School District No. 26 JT,
of the Counties of Saguache and Rio Grande and
Alamosa; Creede Consolidated School District No. 1 in
the County of Mineral and State of Colorado; Del Norte
Consolidated School District No. C-7; Moffat School
District No. 2, in the County of Saguache and State of
Colorado; Monte Vista School District No. C-8; Mountain
Julianna Wade
Page 2 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *29; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **1
Valley School District No. RE 1; North Conejos School
District No. RE-1J; Sanford School District No. 6, in the
County of Conejos and State of Colorado; Sangre de
Cristo School District, No. RE-22J; Sargent School
District No. RE-33J; Sierra Grande School District No.
R-30; and South Conejos School District No. RE10,
Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. State of Colorado; Colorado
State Board of Education; William J. Moloney, in his
official capacity as Commissioner of Education of the
State of Colorado; and Bill Ritter, in his official capacity
as Governor of the State of Colorado,
Defendants-Appellees.
Subsequent History: Released for Publication October
2, 2009.
Writ of certiorari granted in part and denied in part
Lobato v. State, 2008 Colo. LEXIS 898 (Colo., Sept. 15,
2008)
Reversed by, Remanded by Lobato v. State, 218 P.3d
358, 2009 Colo. LEXIS 998 (Colo., Oct. 19, 2009)
Prior History: [**1] City and County of Denver District
Court No. 05CV4794. Honorable Michael A. Martinez,
Judge.
Lobato v. State, 2006 Colo. LEXIS 850 (Colo., Oct. 23,
2006)
and 12(b)(5). The City and County of Denver District

Court, Colorado, dismissed the complaint for lack of
standing and failure to state a claim. Plaintiffs appealed.
Overview
The districts contended that the trial court erred when it
concluded that, as political subdivisions, they lacked
standing. The court found that the districts were properly
dismissed for lack of standing because the Local Control
Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX, 15, did not give them
authority to challenge how the Colorado General
Assembly appropriated state funds to finance education.
The parents had standing. The parents' claims were
properly dismissed as a nonjusticiable political question
because (1) the fashioning of a constitutional system for
financing elementary and secondary public education
in Colorado was not only the proper function of the
Assembly, but this function was expressly mandated by
the constitution; (2) the contours of a "quality" public
education could not have been ascertained by judicially
discoverable or manageable standards because the
Education Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX, 2, provided no
principled basis for a judicial definition; and (3) finding
and enforcing the parents' standard of a constitutionally
adequate, quality public education presented a
substantial risk of judicial intrusion into the powers and
responsibilities of the Assembly.
Disposition: JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.

Outcome
The judgment was affirmed.
Core Terms
thorough, funding, public school, general assembly,
school district, finance, justiciability, courts, public
education,
programs,
schools,
Legislature's,
constitutions, political question, nonjusticiable,
manageable, resources, common school, trial court,
adequacy, rights, constitutional provision, uniform
system, qualitative, political subdivision, state
constitution, lack of standing, institutions, allegations,
suitable
LexisNexis Headnotes
Education Law > Administration & Operation > School
Districts > School District Creation
HN1 See Colo. Const. art. IX, 15.

Education Law > Administration & Operation > General
Overview
Education Law > Students > Right to Education
Case Summary
HN2 See Colo. Const. art. IX, 2.
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure > ... > Jurisdiction > Subject Matter

Jurisdiction > General Overview
Plaintiffs, parents and school districts, brought an action

against defendants, the State and others, that
questioned the adequacy of Colorado's school finance
system under the state constitution. Defendants moved
to dismiss the complaint under Colo. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1)
Civil Procedure > ... > Responses > Defenses, Demurrers

& Objections > Motions to Dismiss
HN3 Colo. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) governs motions to dismiss

for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A court may
Julianna Wade
Page 3 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *29; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **1
determine the jurisdictional issue as a matter of law if it
accepts all a plaintiff's assertions of fact as true.
Civil Procedure > ... > Responses > Defenses, Demurrers
& Objections > Motions to Dismiss
Civil Procedure > Appeals > Standards of Review > Clearly
Erroneous Review
Civil Procedure > Appeals > Standards of Review > De
Novo Review
HN4 On appeal from a dismissal for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction, a reviewing court reviews a trial
court's factual findings for clear error and its legal
conclusions de novo.
Civil Procedure > ... > Defenses, Demurrers & Objections >
Motions to Dismiss > Failure to State Claim
Civil Procedure > ... > Justiciability > Standing > General
Overview
Civil Procedure > ... > Justiciability > Standing > Injury in
Fact
Constitutional Law > ... > Case or Controversy > Standing >
Elements
HN8 A plaintiff has standing if (1) the plaintiff suffered an

actual injury (2) to a legally protected interest. A plaintiff
satisfies the injury in fact requirement by demonstrating
that the activity complained of has caused or has
threatened to cause injury to the plaintiff. The
injury-in-fact limitation is necessary under the separation
of powers doctrine in the Colorado Constitution. The
legally protected interest requirement presents the
question whether the plaintiff has a claim for relief under
the constitution, the common law, a statute, a rule, or a
regulation.

Novo Review
Overview
HN5 A Colo. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss tests

the sufficiency of a complaint. A reviewing court must
accept all matters of material fact in the complaint as
true and view the allegations in the light most favorable
to a plaintiff. A Colo. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(5) motion should
only be granted when the plaintiff's factual allegations
cannot support a claim as a matter of law. The reviewing
court reviews such a ruling de novo.
Constitutional Law > ... > Case or Controversy >

Constitutionality of Legislation > Standing

Novo Review
HN9 A political subdivision lacks standing to challenge

the constitutionality of a statute concerning its
performance. A school district is a subordinate division
of the state, exercising authority to effectuate the state's
education purposes. An exception to the political
subdivision rule is recognized when the constitution or a
statute grants a political subdivision express or implied
authority to file a civil action against the state.
Civil Procedure > Appeals > Standards of Review >

Questions of Fact & Law
Constitutional Law > State Constitutional Operation
HN6 Notwithstanding the allegations of a complaint,

interpretation of a constitutional provision remains a
question of law that a reviewing court reviews de novo.
Overview
Novo Review
General Overview
HN7 Standing is a limitation on a court's subject matter

jurisdiction that a reviewing court reviews de novo. It
has been described as a component of justiciability.
Particular Parties
Districts > General Overview
Governments > State & Territorial Governments > Claims
By & Against

Education Law > School Funding > General Overview
HN10 The Local Control Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX,

15, links control over instruction to locally raised funds,
not to state funding.
Julianna Wade
Page 4 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *29; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **1
HN11 The Local Control Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX,
15, does not give school districts authority to challenge
how the Colorado General Assembly appropriates state
funds to finance education.
General Overview
HN17 Whether a plaintiff has standing is inextricably

tied to the merits of a case.
Overview
Overview
General Overview
General Overview
HN12 The jurisdictional nature of standing permits a

judicial inquiry, even if lack of standing was not raised
by the parties.
HN18 Standing is a threshold jurisdictional question

that must be determined before a case may be decided
on the merits.
Fact
Civil Procedure > ... > Justiciability > Political Questions >
General Overview
Elements
Overview
HN13 In the context of standing, to determine whether

there is an injury-in-fact, a court accepts as true the
allegations set forth in a complaint.
Civil Procedure > Parties > Capacity of Parties > General
Overview
HN14 Parents can sue on behalf of their children.

Fact
Elements

Constitutional Law > The Judiciary > Case or Controversy >
Political Questions
General Overview
HN19 There is a significant difference between

determining whether a court has jurisdiction of the
subject matter and determining whether a cause over
which a court has subject matter jurisdiction is
justiciable. Unlike the standing doctrine of justiciability,
the political question doctrine is not entangled with
subject matter jurisdiction.
HN15 In the context of standing, inadequate access to

public education is an injury-in-fact.
Overview
Elements
HN16 In the context of standing, an interest is legally

protected if the constitution, the common law, a statute,
a rule, or a regulation provides a plaintiff with a claim for
relief. This interest may be having a government that
acts within the boundaries of Colorado's state
constitution.
Overview
General Overview
Political Questions
HN20 Claims that challenge states' school finance

systems under the relevant education clauses raise a
nonjusticiable political question.
General Overview
Political Questions
HN21 There are six independent factors to review in

determining whether a nonjusticiable political question
Julianna Wade
Page 5 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *29; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **1
has been raised: (1) a textually demonstrable
constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate
political department; or (2) a lack of judicially
discoverable and manageable standards for resolving
it; or (3) the impossibility of deciding without an initial
policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial
discretion; or (4) the impossibility of a court's undertaking
independent resolution without expressing lack of the
respect due coordinate branches of government; or (5)
an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a
political decision already made; or (6) the potentiality of
embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by
various departments on one question. These factors
are probably listed in descending order of both
importance and certainty. A court should not dismiss a
case for lack of justiciability unless one of these
formulations is inextricable from the case at bar. Claims
that present a political question must be dismissed.
Constitutional Law > Congressional Duties & Powers >
General Overview
Overview
HN22 The Colorado General Assembly has plenary

power to enact legislation, including appropriations.
Colo. Const. art. 5, 32. In addition, the Education
Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX, 2, specifically directs the
General Assembly to establish and maintain the system
of free public education. Hence, the fashioning of a
constitutional system for financing elementary and
secondary public education in Colorado is not only the
proper function of the General Assembly, but this
function is expressly mandated by the Colorado
Constitution.
Separation of Powers
Political Questions
HN23 In the context of determining whether a

nonjusticiable political question has been raised, lack of
judicially manageable standards may strengthen the
conclusion that there is a textually demonstrable
commitment to a coordinate branch.
Constitutional Law > The Judiciary > General Overview
Governments > Courts > Authority to Adjudicate
HN24 Under Colo. Const. art. VI, 1, the judicial branch

is empowered to construe the constitution's meaning. A
court affords constitutional language its ordinary and
common meaning; where the language is clear, the
court interprets it as written. The court construes
constitutional provisions as a whole, giving effect to
every word whenever possible.
Overview
HN25 The Education Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX, 2,

contains two operative terms: thorough and uniform.
"Thorough" is defined as marked by completeness and
carried through to completion with full attention to
details. "Uniform" is defined as marked by lack of
variation, diversity, change in form, manner, worth, or
degree. The ordinary meaning of those words does not
provide a standard to determine whether there is a
qualitative educational guarantee.
HN26 Interpretation cannot solve the lack of clarity or

definition in a constitutional provision itself. Instead,
that uncertainty is for the Colorado General Assembly
to elucidate with implementing language or, ultimately,
for the voting public to ameliorate by amending the
constitutional provision.
Overview
HN27 The Education Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX, 2,

mandates the Colorado General Assembly to provide to
each school age child the opportunity to receive a free
education, and to establish guidelines for a thorough
and uniform system of public schools. The reference to
"guidelines" weighs against interpreting "thorough and
uniform" as providing the means to define any qualitative
educational guarantee.
Overview
HN28 The question of educational quality is inherently

one of policy involving philosophical and practical
considerations that call for the exercise of legislative
and administrative discretion.
Julianna Wade
Page 6 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *29; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **1
HN29 A court must not make or weigh policy.

General Overview
Overview
HN30 The best public policy which can be adopted to

attain quality school and equal educational opportunity
for all children lies within the Colorado General
Assembly's domain.
General Overview
Overview
HN31 Because the relationship between school funding

and educational quality also requires weighing federal
and state mandates under the education reform
legislation, school districts' local efforts, and the state's
ability to provide funding, courts cannot make that
determination without deciding matters of educational
policy in disregard of the policy and fiscal choices
already made by the Colorado General Assembly.
HN34 Judicial power is limited to the extent that a court

may not order the legislature to convene, consider
issues, or enact specific legislation.
Counsel: Alexander Halpern, LLC, Alexander Halpern,
Kathleen J. Gebhardt, Michelle Murphy, Boulder,
Colorado, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
John W. Suthers, Attorney General, Daniel D.
Domenico, Solicitor General, John R. Sleeman, Jr.,
First Assistant Attorney General, Antony B. Dyl,
Assistant Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, for
Defendants-Appellees.
Davis Graham & Stubbs, LLP, Kenzo S. Kawanabe,
Ryan Lessmann, Denver, Colorado, for Amicus Curiae
Great Education Colorado.
Lauren B. Kingsbery, Valerie L. Simons, Denver,
Colorado, for Amicus Curiae Colorado Association of
School Boards and Colorado Association for School
Executives.
Martha R. Houser, Denver, Colorado, for Amicus Curiae
Colorado Education Association.
Judges: Opinion by: JUDGE WEBB. Casebolt and
Terry, JJ., concur.
General Overview
Opinion by: WEBB

Political Questions
Opinion
HN32 Deciding whether a matter has been committed

by the Constitution to another branch of government is
itself a delicate exercise in constitutional interpretation.
However, when a court concludes that an issue presents
a nonjusticiable political question, it declines to address
the merits of that issue and acknowledges the possibility
that a constitutional provision may not be judicially
enforceable.
Civil Procedure > Preliminary
Justiciability > General Overview
Considerations
>
HN33 A justiciable issue requires a present, substantial

controversy between parties having adverse legal
interests susceptible to immediate resolution and
capable of present judicial enforcement.
Constitutional Law > The Judiciary > Congressional Limits
[*32] This case questions the adequacy of Colorado's

school finance system under the state constitution.
Plaintiffs, Anthony Lobato, as an individual and as a
parent and natural guardian of Taylor and Alexa Lobato,
and forty-six other persons in their capacities as
taxpayers and parents of children in various Colorado
school [**2] districts (parents), together with fourteen
school districts in the San Luis Valley (school districts),
appeal the judgment in favor of defendants, State of
Colorado, Colorado State Board of Education, William
J. Moloney, in his official capacity as Commissioner of
Education of the State of Colorado, and Bill Ritter, in his
official capacity as Governor of the State of Colorado,
dismissing the complaint for lack of standing and failure
to state a claim.
We conclude that as political subdivisions, the school

districts lack standing, and that the parents' challenge
Julianna Wade
Page 7 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *32; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **2
to the adequacy of school financing is a nonjusticiable
political question. Having so concluded, we do not
decide whether the parents' claims, if justiciable, are
nevertheless precluded by Colorado Constitution article IX, section 17 (Amendment 23). Therefore, we
affirm.
I. Background
A. Colorado Constitutional Provisions
Three constitutional provisions are at issue in this case:
(1) article IX, section 15 (Local Control Clause); (2)
article IX, section 2 (Education Clause); and (3) Amendment 23.
The Local Control Clause states in relevant part: HN1
"The general assembly shall . . . provide for organization
of school districts . . [**3] . in each of which shall be
established a board of education, to consist of three or
more directors . . . . Said directors shall have control of
instruction in the public schools of their respective
districts."
The Education Clause states in relevant part: HN2 "The
general assembly shall . . . provide for the establishment
and maintenance of a thorough and uniform system of
free public schools throughout the state, wherein all
residents of the state, between the ages of six and
twenty-one years, may be educated gratuitously."
Amendment 23 states in relevant part:
(1) . . . . In state fiscal year 2001-2002 through state
fiscal year 2010-2011, the statewide base per pupil
funding . . . for public education . . . and total state
funding for all categorical programs shall grow
annually at least by the rate of inflation plus an
additional one percentage point . . . .
(2) . . . . "Categorical programs" include
transportation programs, English language
proficiency programs, expelled and at-risk student
programs, special education programs (including
gifted and talented programs), suspended student
programs, vocational education programs, small
attendance centers, comprehensive health
education programs, [**4] and other current and
future accountable programs specifically identified
in statute as a categorical program . . . .
(3) . . . . [T]he general assembly may annually
appropriate, and school districts may annually
expend, monies from the state education fund

created . . . .
[*33] (4)(b) . . . . Monies in the state education fund
may only be used to comply with subsection (1)

[categorical programs] and for accountable
education reform, for accountable programs to meet
state academic standards, for class size reduction,
for expanding technology education, for improving
student safety, for expanding the availability of
preschool and kindergarten programs, for
performance incentives for teachers, for
accountability reporting, or for public school building
capital construction.
B. Plaintiffs' Allegations
Plaintiffs alleged that (1) the current school finance
system violates the mandate of a "thorough and uniform"
public education system under the Education Clause;
(2) the General Assembly has enacted education reform
legislation imposing state-wide education standards and
instructional goals which were established without
determining whether sufficient financial resources exist
to accomplish those [**5] goals; and (3) the school
finance system fails to provide sufficient funding to
permit school districts either to meet accountability
standards and goals, or to provide necessary staffing,
services, programs, and facilities to fulfill the goals
under federal and state education reform legislation.
Plaintiffs sought a declaration that (1) the Education
Clause requires the General Assembly to "provide the
financial resources necessary, sufficient, and
appropriate to assure that all [school-age children] have
an equal opportunity to obtain a constitutionally
adequate, quality education"; (2) the school finance
system fails to provide funding in an amount and manner
to meet the mandate of the Education Clause; and (3)
the school finance system violates the rights and
authority of the school districts' local boards of education
as provided in the Local Control Clause.
They also sought an injunction compelling defendants
to design, enact, fund, and implement a school finance
system that provides sufficient funding to maintain a
thorough and uniform system of free public schools,
and prohibiting defendants from further executing and
implementing the current school finance system. Finally,
they [**6] asked the trial court to retain jurisdiction over
the matter until defendants have complied.
C. Defendants' Response
Julianna Wade
Page 8 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *33; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **6
Defendants moved to dismiss under C.R.C.P. 12(b)(1)
and 12(b)(5). Defendants asserted that, as political
subdivisions, the school districts lacked standing
because they cannot challenge statutes directing the
performance of their duties; that plaintiffs presented a
nonjusticiable political question because the Colorado
Constitution commits the determination of educational
adequacy to the General Assembly and judicial
standards for measuring educational adequacy do not
exist; that by adopting Amendment 23, the voters have
exercised their constitutional authority to determine the
constitutionally required level of state funding; and that
the school finance system satisfies Amendment 23.
They make the same arguments on appeal.
D. Trial Court's Judgment
The trial court dismissed plaintiffs' claims without taking
evidence. It concluded that the funding levels dictated
by Amendment 23 were consistent with the Education
Clause; that because the school finance system is in
accord with Amendment 23, their claims were
nonjusticiable; and that as political subdivisions, the
school [**7] districts lacked standing. The court did not
define the phrase "thorough and uniform" contained
within the Education Clause.
II. Standard of Review
HN3 C.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) governs motions to dismiss for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Egle v. City & County
of Denver, 93 P.3d 609, 611 (Colo. App. 2004). A court
may determine the jurisdictional issue as a matter of law
if it accepts all the plaintiff's assertions of fact as true.
Hansen v. Long, 166 P.3d 248, 250 (Colo. App. 2007).
HN4 On appeal from a dismissal for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction, we review a trial court's factual
findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de
novo. Egle, 93 P.3d at 611.
[*34] HN5 A C.R.C.P. 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss tests
the sufficiency of the complaint. Wagner v. Grange Ins.

Ass'n, 166 P.3d 304, 306 (Colo. App. 2007). A reviewing
court must "accept all matters of material fact in the
complaint as true and view the allegations in the light
most favorable to the plaintiff." Id. at 306-07 (quoting
BRW, Inc. v. Dufficy & Sons, Inc., 99 P.3d 66, 71 (Colo.
2004)). A C.R.C.P. 12 (b) (5) motion should only be
granted when "the plaintiff's factual allegations cannot
support a claim as a matter of law." Id. at 307
[**8] (quoting BRW, 99 P.3d at 71).
We review such a ruling de novo. Id. HN6
Notwithstanding the allegations of a complaint,
interpretation of a constitutional provision remains a

question of law that we also review de novo. See Bd. of
County Comm'rs v. City & County of Broomfield, 62 P.3d
1086, 1088, 1091 (Colo. App. 2002)(motion for judgment
on the pleadings).
III. Standing
HN7 Standing is a limitation on a court's subject matter
jurisdiction that we review de novo. People in Interest of
J.C.S., 169 P.3d 240, 243 (Colo. App. 2007); First
Horizon Merch. Servs., Inc. v. Wellspring Capital
Mgmt., LLC, 166 P.3d 166, 180 (Colo. App. 2007). It has
been described as a component of justiciability. City of
Greenwood Village v. Petitioners for Proposed City of
Centennial, 3 P.3d 427, 436 (Colo. 2000).
HN8 A plaintiff has standing if (1) the plaintiff suffered an
actual injury (2) to a legally protected interest. Ainscough v. Owens, 90 P.3d 851, 855 (Colo. 2004);
J.C.S., 169 P.3d at 245.
"A plaintiff satisfies the injury in fact requirement by
demonstrating that the activity complained of has
caused or has threatened to cause injury to the plaintiff
. . . ." J.C.S., 169 P.3d at 245 (quoting Dunlap v. Colo.
Springs Cablevision, Inc., 829 P.2d 1286, 1289 (Colo.
1992)). [**9] The injury-in-fact limitation is necessary
under the separation of powers doctrine in the Colorado
Constitution. Ainscough, 90 P.3d at 856.
The legally protected interest requirement presents the
question whether the plaintiff has a claim for relief under
the constitution, the common law, a statute, a rule, or a
regulation. Id.
A. School Districts' Standing
The school districts contend the trial court erred when it
concluded that, as political subdivisions, they lack
standing. We disagree.
HN9 A political subdivision lacks standing to challenge
the constitutionality of a statute concerning its
performance. Denver Ass'n for Retarded Children, Inc.
v. Sch. Dist. No. 1, 188 Colo. 310, 316, 535 P.2d 200,
204 (1975); Clear Creek Sch. Dist. RE-1 v. Holmes, 628
P.2d 154, 155 (Colo. App. 1981).
A school district is a subordinate division of the state,
exercising authority to effectuate the state's education
purposes. Holmes, 628 P.2d at 155; Bagby v. Sch. Dist.
No. 1, 186 Colo. 428, 435, 528 P.2d 1299, 1302 (1974).
Julianna Wade
Page 9 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *34; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **9
An exception to the political subdivision rule is
recognized when the constitution or a statute grants a
political subdivision express or implied authority to file a
civil action against [**10] the state. Romer v. Fountain
Sanitation Dist., 898 P.2d 37, 40 (Colo. 1995); see also
East Grand County Sch. Dist. No. 2 v. Town of Winter
Park, 739 P.2d 862, 865 (Colo. App. 1987) (school
district had standing to challenge enactment of urban
renewal plan because a statute allowed "an affected
school district to participate in an advisory capacity with
respect to the implementation of tax increment financing
in an urban renewal project").
We reject the school districts' assertion that this
exception applies because the Local Control Clause
vests in them a legally protected interest in controlling
instruction in schools, including funding.
HN10 The Local Control Clause links control over
instruction to locally raised funds, not to state funding.
See Owens v. Colorado Congress of Parents, Teachers
& Students, 92 P.3d 933, 943 (Colo. 2004) (state
program requiring school districts to pay funds from
locally raised tax revenues to parents, who then must
pay those funds to nonpublic [*35] schools, denied
local school districts discretion to allocate locally raised
funds under the Local Control Clause); Lujan v. Colorado State Bd. of Educ., 649 P.2d 1005, 1023 (Colo.
1982)(Local Control Clause protects [**11] school
districts against legislative efforts to require them to
spend locally raised funds on instruction that the school
district does not control); Belier v. Wilson, 59 Colo. 96,
98, 147 P. 355, 356 (1915) (taxes raised in one school
district cannot be used to fund a school in another
district under the Local Control Clause).
Therefore, we conclude that the trial court properly
dismissed the school districts for lack of standing
because HN11 the Local Control Clause does not give
them authority to challenge how the General Assembly
appropriates state funds to finance education.
B. Parents' Standing
HN12 The jurisdictional nature of standing permits a
judicial inquiry, even if lack of standing was not raised
by the parties. Romer v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 956
P.2d 566, 586 (Colo. 1998); J.C.S., 169 P.3d at 244. We
address sua sponte whether the parents have standing,
and conclude that they do.
1. Injury-in-Fact
HN13 "To determine whether there is an injury-in-fact,

we accept as true the allegations set forth in the
complaint." Ainscough, 90 P.3d at 857. HN14 Parents
can sue on behalf of their children. See Bartlett v. Elgin,
973 P.2d 694, 697 (Colo. App. 1998), aff'd, 994 P.2d 411
(Colo. 1999).
Here, the parents [**12] allege that the cost of educating
students in accordance with the Education Clause and
education reform legislation exceeds the maximum
amount of funding available under the current school
finance system, and thus without sufficient financial
resources, students do not have adequate access to (1)
instructional materials (i.e., textbooks, computers,
software, audio-visual equipment, and library books)
and (2) programs and services for underserved and
at-risk students, gifted and talented students, and
non-college bound students.
Accepting these allegations as true, we conclude that
HN15 inadequate access to public education is an
injury-in-fact. See Ainscough, 90 P.3d at 856 (Colorado
case law provides "broad taxpayer standing in the trial
and appellate courts"; standing is conferred when "a
plaintiff argues that a governmental action that harms
[the plaintiff] is unconstitutional"); Barber v. Ritter, 170
P.3d 763, 768 (Colo. App. 2007) (cert. granted Nov. 13,
2007) ("In cases involving a taxpayer's standing, general
allegations of injury are sufficient . . . .").
2. Legally Protected Interest
HN16 An interest is legally protected if the constitution,
the common law, a statute, a rule, or a regulation
[**13] provides the plaintiff with a claim for relief. Ainscough, 90 P.3d at 856. This interest may be "having a
government that acts within the boundaries of our state
constitution." Id.
According to the parents, the Education Clause gives
children a legally protected interest in a "thorough and
uniform" free public school education system that
guarantees them "a constitutionally adequate, quality
public education." Under the parents' interpretation of
the Education Clause, they have identified a legally
protected interest at issue. See Dunlap, 829 P.2d at
1289 (HN17 whether a plaintiff has standing is
inextricably tied to the merits of the case); Wilson v.
Prentiss, 140 P.3d 288, 290 (Colo. App. 2006)(HN18
"Standing is a threshold jurisdictional question that must
be determined before a case may be decided on the
merits.").
Julianna Wade
Page 10 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *35; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **13
Thus, having subject matter jurisdiction because of the
parents' standing, we turn to the political question
limitation on justiciability. Because we have concluded
that only the parents have standing, the remainder of
this opinion is limited to their allegations.
IV. Justiciability
We conclude that the parents' claims are barred by the
political question doctrine, but unlike the [**14] trial
court, we do not rely on Amendment 23.
[*36] A. Lujan and Justiciability
Initially, we reject the parents' argument that Lujan

impliedly establishes claims concerning the quality and
level of funding under the Education Clause to be
justiciable.
The majority opinion does not mention justiciability.
Although the Lujan court exercised jurisdiction, HN19
"there is a significant difference between determining
whether a . . . court has 'jurisdiction of the subject
matter' and determining whether a cause over which a
court has subject matter jurisdiction is 'justiciable.'"
Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 512, 89 S. Ct.
1944, 23 L. Ed. 2d 491 (1969) (citing Baker v. Carr, 369
U.S. 186, 198, 82 S. Ct. 691, 7 L. Ed. 2d 663 (1962)).
In Baker, the Supreme Court explained the distinction
between "lack of federal jurisdiction" and
"inappropriateness of subject matter for judicial
consideration." See Nebraska Coalition for Educ. Equity & Adequacy v. Heineman, 273 Neb. 531, 731
N.W.2d 164, 174-75 (Neb. 2007). "Unlike the standing
doctrine of justiciability, the political question doctrine is
not entangled with subject matter jurisdiction." Id. at 175
(citing Powell and Baker)(footnote omitted).
B. The Majority Rule
The parents assert that the trial court disregarded the
"overwhelming [**15] majority" of jurisdictions which
have held that challenges to their states' school finance
systems under the relevant education clauses are
justiciable. They cite to Neeley v. West Orange-Cove
Consolidated Independent School District, 176 S.W.3d
746, 780-81 nn. 182-83 (Tex. 2005), as demonstrating
that states addressing this issue are split fifteen to four
in their favor.
Based on our review of this authority (see Appendix A),
we feel no compulsion to follow the majority rule
because of anomalies such as the following:
. The constitutions of Idaho, New Jersey,

Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, and Wyoming
include the word "thorough." Of these states, only
Pennsylvania has held the funding dispute
nonjusticiable. But in New Jersey, West Virginia,
and Wyoming, education is a fundamental
constitutional right. By contrast, the Lujan majority
held that "[a] heartfelt recognition and endorsement
of the importance of an education does not elevate
a public education to a fundamental interest
warranting strict scrutiny." 649 P.2d at 1018.
. The constitutions of Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky,
and Illinois contain the term "efficient," but not
"thorough." These [**16] states are evenly split on
justiciability.
. Language most consistent with a qualitative
guarantee ("high quality") appears in the
constitutions of Florida and Illinois, but both states
have ruled the funding issue nonjusticiable.
. The constitutions of Massachusetts and New
Hampshire contain only very general language ("to
cherish the interests of literature and the sciences"),
but both states have found justiciability.
. Comparably amorphous language appears in the
constitutions of Nebraska ("free instruction in the
common schools") and Oklahoma ("a system of
free public schools"), but neither state has found
justiciability.
In our view, none of these terms has sufficient intrinsic
meaning to explain such different resolutions of similar
funding claims. We perceive that these diverse
outcomes are not based on the constitutional language
at issue alone, but often "revolve around policy choices
and value determinations." Heineman, 731 N.W.2d at
177 (citing Japan Whaling Ass'n v. Am. Cetacean Soc'y,
478 U.S. 221, 230, 106 S. Ct. 2860, 92 L. Ed. 2d 166
(1986)).
Instead of dealing with "policy choices and value
determinations," we adopt the minority view that HN20
such claims raise a nonjusticiable political question
because, as [**17] discussed in the remainder of this
section IV, that view is more consistent with the principle
of judicial restraint. See People v. Summit, 183 Colo.
421, 426, 517 P.2d 850, 853 (1974)(refusing to strike
the statutory classification of marijuana as a narcotic
because it was "a matter strictly for the legislature"); cf.
Deriso v. Cooper, 246 Ga. 540, 272 S.E.2d 274, 277
Julianna Wade
Page 11 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *36; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **17
(Ga. 1980) (declining to address "the myriad other
matter involved in everyday administration [*37] of a
public school system which the courts would face were
they to embark upon the course of judicial activism
desired by the school patrons. Resolution of these
discretionary policy determinations can best be made
by other branches of government.").
C. Nonjusticiable Political Question
Baker sets forth HN21 six independent factors to review
in determining whether a nonjusticiable political question
has been raised: (1) "a textually demonstrable
constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate
political department"; or (2) "a lack of judicially
discoverable and manageable standards for resolving
it"; or (3) "the impossibility of deciding without an initial
policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial
discretion"; or (4) "the impossibility [**18] of a court's
undertaking independent resolution without expressing
lack of the respect due coordinate branches of
government"; or (5) "an unusual need for unquestioning
adherence to a political decision already made"; or (6)
"the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious
pronouncements by various departments on one
question." Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267, 277-78, 124
S. Ct. 1769, 158 L. Ed. 2d 546 (2004)(quoting Baker,
369 U.S. at 217); Meyer v. Lamm, 846 P.2d 862, 872-73
(Colo. 1993).
These factors are "probably listed in descending order
of both importance and certainty." Vieth, 541 U.S. at
277. A court should not dismiss a case for lack of
justiciability "[u]nless one of these formulations is
inextricable from the case at bar." Baker, 369 U.S. at
217; see Schneider v. Kissinger, 366 U.S. App. D.C.
408, 412 F.3d 190, 194 (D. C. Cir. 2005)("To find a
political question, we need only conclude that one factor
is present, not all."). Claims that present a political
question must be dismissed. See 13A Charles Alan
Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and
Procedure 3534.3 (2007).
For the following reasons, we conclude that the first
through fourth Baker factors [**19] apply to this case,
and therefore we agree with the trial court's dismissal.
1. Textually Demonstrable Constitutional Commitment
of Issue to Coordinate Political Department
HN22 The General Assembly has plenary power to
enact legislation, including appropriations. Colo. Const.
art. 5, 32; Colorado Gen. Assembly v. Owens, 136

P.3d 262, 266 (Colo. 2006); Barber, 170 P.3d at 774. In
addition, the Education Clause specifically directs the
General Assembly to establish and maintain the system
of free public education. Hence, "the fashioning of a
constitutional system for financing elementary and
secondary public education in Colorado is not only the
proper function of the General Assembly, but this
function is expressly mandated by the Colorado
Constitution." Lujan, 649 P.2d at 1024.
2. Lack of Judicially Discoverable and Manageable
Standards for Resolving Issue
HN23 "[L]ack of judicially manageable standards may
strengthen the conclusion that there is a textually
demonstrable commitment to a coordinate branch."
Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224, 228-29, 113 S. Ct.
732, 122 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1993). Thus, we consider the
meaning of "thorough and uniform," on which the
parents base their claims, but discern in this language
no such "manageable [**20] standards" for determining
a qualitative educational guarantee, as the parents
assert, with which a trial court could measure the
constitutional adequacy of funding for education.
HN24 Under article VI, section 1 of the Colorado
Constitution, the judicial branch is empowered to
construe the constitution's meaning. Bd. of County
Comm'rs v. Vail Assocs., Inc., 19 P.3d 1263, 1272
(Colo. 2001).
We afford constitutional language its ordinary and
common meaning; where the language is clear, we
interpret it as written. Washington County Bd. of Equalization v. Petron Dev. Co., 109 P.3d 146, 149 (Colo.
2005). We construe constitutional provisions as a whole,
giving effect to every word whenever possible. Id.
In addressing the meaning of the Education Clause, the
parties cite no constitutional history. Nor did the court in
Lujan [*38] "find any historical background to glean
guidance regarding the intention of the framers"
regarding the meaning of "thorough and uniform." 649
P.2d at 1024-25.
HN25 The Education Clause contains two operative
terms: thorough and uniform. "Thorough" is defined as
"marked by completeness" and "carried through to
completion esp. [sic] with full attention to details."
Webster's Third [**21] New International Dictionary
2380 (2002). "Uniform" is defined as "marked by lack of
variation, diversity, change in form, manner, worth, or
degree." Id. at 2498.
Julianna Wade
Page 12 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *38; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **21
The ordinary meaning of those words does not provide
a standard to determine whether there is a qualitative
educational guarantee urged by the parents. See
Gresh v. Balink, 148 P.3d 419, 423 (Colo. App.
2006)(HN26 "[I]nterpretation cannot solve the lack of
clarity or definition in the constitutional provision itself.
Instead, that uncertainty is for the General Assembly to
elucidate with implementing language or, ultimately, for
the voting public to ameliorate by amending the
constitutional provision.").
Lujan does not support finding such a standard in the
term "uniform." Although the Lujan court addressed
only equal protection under the Education Clause, it
determined that a "thorough and uniform" system did
not require identical per pupil educational expenditures.
649 P.2d at 1025.
The Lujan majority explained that HN27 the Education
Clause "mandates the General Assembly to provide to
each school age child the opportunity to receive a free
education, and to establish guidelines for a thorough
and uniform system of public schools." Id. at 1018-19
[**22] (emphasis added). The reference to "guidelines"
in Lujan weighs against interpreting "thorough and
uniform" as providing the means to define any such
qualitative educational guarantee. See Webster's Third
New International Dictionary at 1009 ("guideline: . . . (c)
an indication or outline of future policy or conduct (as of
a government)"); cf. Jaynes v. Centura Health Corp.,
148 P.3d 241, 249 (Colo. App. 2006)(employment
performance policy setting forth "guidelines" gave
management discretion in dealing with unacceptable
employee behavior but did not create an enforceable
right).
We are not persuaded otherwise by the parents' reliance
on cases such as Fangman v. Moyers, 90 Colo. 308,
311-12, 8 P.2d 762, 764 (1932), which merely stand for
the proposition that the Education Clause assures all
children access to free instruction in public schools. The
parents do not assert that the school finance system
fails to provide resources essential to free basic
instruction. Rather, they argue that the system is
unconstitutional because it does not provide "a
constitutionally adequate, quality public education."
(Emphasis added.)
But the contours of a "quality" public education cannot
be ascertained [**23] by judicially discoverable or
manageable standards because the Education Clause
"provides no principled basis for a judicial definition."
Comm. for Educ. Rights v. Edgar, 174 Ill. 2d 1, 672

N.E.2d 1178, 1191, 220 Ill. Dec. 166 (Ill. 1996).
Although the Edgar court dealt with constitutional
language involving an "efficient system of high quality
public educational institutions," such language is less
amorphous than "thorough and uniform." Nevertheless,
that court explained:
It would be a transparent conceit to suggest that
whatever standards of quality courts might develop
would actually be derived from the constitution in
any meaningful sense. Nor is education a subject
within the judiciary's field of expertise . . . . Rather,
HN28 the question of educational quality is
inherently one of policy involving philosophical and
practical considerations that call for the exercise of
legislative and administrative discretion.
To hold that the question of educational quality is
subject to judicial determination would largely
deprive the members of the general public of a
voice in a matter which is close to the hearts of all
individuals in Illinois . . . . In contrast, an open and
robust public debate is the lifeblood of the political
[**24] process in our system of representative
democracy. Solutions to problems of educational
quality should emerge from a spirited dialogue
between the people of the State and their elected
representatives.
[*39] Id.; see also Heineman, 731 N.W.2d at 180 ("We
interpret the paucity of standards in the free instruction
clause as the framers' intent to commit the determination
of adequate school funding solely to the legislature's
discretion, greater resources, and expertise.").
Cases from other jurisdictions such as Idaho, New

Jersey, Ohio, and Wyoming, which in addressing similar
claims have defined "thorough" based on constitutional
history and legislative definitions of constitutional
language, are inapposite because these extrinsic
resources do not exist in Colorado. (See Appendix B.)
Even without such extrinsic resources, some courts
have arrived at different definitions of "thorough," and
those disparate definitions have had a significant impact
on the courts' interpretation of whether a legislative
obligation exists to fund a certain level of quality in
public education. Compare Robinson v. Cahill, 118 N.J.
Super. 223, 287 A.2d 187, 211 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div.
1972) ("thorough" means "more than simply adequate
Julianna Wade
Page 13 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *39; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **25
[**25] or minimal"), modified, 62 N.J. 473, 303 A.2d 273
(N.J. 1973), and Idaho Sch. for Equal Educ. Opportunity v. State, 976 P.2d 913, 920, 132 Idaho 559 (Idaho
1998) ("Even without these expressions from the
Legislature and the State Board, . . . we conclude that a
safe environment conducive to learning is inherently a
part of a thorough system of public, free common
schools . . . ."), with Pauley v. Kelly, 162 W. Va. 672, 255
S.E.2d 859, 877 (W. Va. 1979) (a system of schools that
"develops, as best the state of education expertise
allows, the minds, bodies and social morality of its
charges to prepare them for useful and happy
occupations, recreation and citizenship, and does so
economically" (emphasis added)).
We are unable to discern any textual basis for these
different definitions. Cf. Fraternal Order of Police, Colo.
Lodge No. 27 v. City & County of Denver, 926 P.2d 582,
591 (Colo. 1996)(noting "direct textual support in the
Colorado constitution"). The absence of textual support
again suggests that these courts are making policy
choices based on value judgments. See Heineman,
731 N.W.2d at 177. We do not perceive policy
arguments as a sufficient basis for divining constitutional
standards that a trial court could use to assess [**26] the
adequacy of educational funding.
Nevertheless, the parents assert that declining to find a
qualitative educational guarantee in the Education
Clause would abrogate the judicial branch's obligation
to interpret the constitution. To the contrary, we have
considered the meaning of "thorough and uniform," and
have concluded that this language does not provide any
manageable standard for determining the qualitative
guarantee asserted by the parents as a method of
assessing adequate funding.
3. Impossibility of Deciding Issue Without Making Policy
Determinations Requiring Nonjudicial Discretion
HN29 A court must not make or weigh policy. Town of
Telluride v. Lot Thirty-Four Venture, L.L.C., 3 P.3d 30,
38 (Colo. 2000); Concerned Parents of Pueblo, Inc. v.
Gilmore, 47 P.3d 311, 313 (Colo. 2002); see also Martin
v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., P.3d , , 186 P.3d 61, 2007
Colo. App. LEXIS 1854, *15 (Colo. App. No. 05CA1917,
Sept. 20, 2007)("[P]olicy judgments are the exclusive
province of the General Assembly.").
The Lujan majority recognized that HN30 the "best
public policy which can be adopted to attain quality
school and equal educational opportunity for all children"
lies within the General Assembly's domain. 649 P.2d at

1018; cf. Denver Parents Ass'n v. Denver Bd. of Educ.,
10 P.3d 662, 665 (Colo. App. 2000) [**27] ("Plaintiffs
cannot hold a public school district to the implementation
of its educational objectives in a judicial setting . . . .
[S]uch policy issues should be addressed at the ballot
box, not presented as a judicially enforceable contract
claim.").
The Lujan majority rejected a "direct correlation between
school financing and educational quality and
opportunity" as the basis for a decision, explaining that
any such correlation involved "the realm of social policy."
649 P.2d at 1018. HN31 Because the relationship
between school funding and educational quality also
requires weighing federal and state mandates under
the education reform legislation, school districts' local
efforts, and the State's ability to provide funding, courts
cannot [*40] "make that determination without deciding
matters of educational policy in disregard of the policy
and fiscal choices" already made by the General
Assembly. Heineman, 731 N.W.2d at 183; see also
Edgar, 672 N.E.2d at 1191 ("Solutions to problems of
educational quality should emerge from a spirited
dialogue between the people of the State and their
elected representatives."); Oklahoma Educ. Ass'n v.
State ex rel. Oklahoma Legislature, 2007 OK 30, 158
P.3d 1058, 1066 (Okla. 2007)("To [**28] do as plaintiffs
ask would require this court to invade the Legislature's
power to determine policy. This we are constitutionally
prohibited from doing."); Marrero v. Commonwealth,
559 Pa. 14, 739 A.2d 110, 111 (Pa. 1999)("[I]t would be
impossible to resolve the claims without making an
initial policy determination of a kind which is clearly of
legislative, and not judicial, discretion.").
4. Impossibility of Resolving Issue Without Disregarding
General Assembly's Authority
Finding and enforcing the parents' standard of a
"constitutionally adequate, quality public education"
would "present a substantial risk of judicial intrusion into
the powers and responsibilities" of the General
Assembly. Coalition for Adequacy & Fairness in Sch.
Funding, Inc. v. Chiles, 680 So. 2d 400, 408 (Fla. 1996).
Determining the changes necessary to the school
finance system would require a court to weigh the
General Assembly's judgments as to both education
reform and financing. Hence, such evaluation of the
General Assembly's action or inaction as to school
financing "would, in order to be effective, necessarily
involve a usurpation of that power entrusted exclusively
Julianna Wade
Page 14 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *40; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **28
to the Legislature." Ex parte James, 836 So. 2d 813,
818 (Ala. 2002).
Moreover, [**29] because of the funding limitations in
Colorado Constitution article X, section 20, the
Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR), a judicial requirement
of additional school funding could force the General
Assembly to reduce general fund appropriations in other
areas. Such action would embroil the courts in the
appropriation and budgeting process. Cf. Chiles, 680
So. 2d at 406-07 (refusing to declare that the present
school funding level was constitutionally inadequate
because "the courts would necessarily be required to
subjectively evaluate the Legislature's value judgments
as to the spending priorities to be assigned to the state's
many needs, education being one among them").
present, substantial controversy between parties having

adverse legal interests susceptible to immediate
resolution [*41] and capable of present judicial
enforcement.").
Here, the parents sought injunctive relief, as set forth
[**31] above, and requested that the trial court retain
jurisdiction over the matter until defendants implement
and fund a school finance system that meets the Education Clause's alleged qualitative guarantee. Thus, "if
the [c]ourt were to declare present funding levels
'inadequate,' presumably the [parents] would expect
the [c]ourt to evaluate, and either affirm or set aside,
future appropriation decisions . . . ." Chiles, 680 So. 2d
at 407. In such proceedings, "educational philosophy
and needs change constantly." Campbell Cty. Sch. Dist.
v. State, 907 P.2d 1238, 1258 (Wyo. 1995).
5. Baker Factors (5) and (6)

The remaining Baker factors have not been discussed
in any Colorado case, nor are they well defined in
federal precedent or secondary authority. 13A Federal
Practice and Procedure 3534. We decline to address
these factors because even one factor is sufficient to
find that a political question exists, and we have
concluded that the first through fourth factors apply.
See Schneider, 412 F.3d at 194.
In sum, HN32 "[d]eciding whether a matter has . . . been
committed by the Constitution to another [**30] branch
of government . . . is itself a delicate exercise in
constitutional interpretation." Baker, 369 U.S. at 211.
However, "[w]hen a court concludes that an issue
presents a nonjusticiable political question, it declines
to address the merits of that issue" and "acknowledges
the possibility that a constitutional provision may not be
judicially enforceable." United States Dep't of Commerce v. Montana, 503 U.S. 442, 457-58, 112 S. Ct.
1415, 118 L. Ed. 2d 87 (1992).
Accordingly, the political question doctrine compels us
to reject the parents' invitation to have the trial court
determine what level of school financing the General
Assembly must provide.
D. Impossibility of Immediate Resolution
We also feel constrained to resolve any doubt over
justiciability of the parents' claims against them because
ongoing judicial review of the school finance system
under the Education Clause raises the spectre of lengthy
and potentially unending litigation. See Heineman, 731
N.W.2d at 173 (HN33 "A justiciable issue requires a
Despite the parents' request for injunctive relief, their

reply brief acknowledges that HN34 judicial power is
limited "to the extent that a court may not order the
legislature 'to convene, consider issues, or enact
specific legislation,' Beauprez v. Avalos, 42 P.3d 642,
648 (Colo. 2002)," and states that the parents "do not
ask the court to direct the General Assembly to convene
or adopt specific legislation."
The declaratory relief sought by the parents would
require the trial court to hear evidence of competing
policy choices and prioritize financial resources, a
process better suited to legislative inquiry than to
[**32] judicial fact finding. Cf. Dean v. District of Columbia, 653 A.2d 307, 326 (D.C. 1995)(Ferren, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part)("[T]here is
quite a difference between saying a court should not
engage in any legislative fact-finding and saying a court
should stay away from particular legislative fact-finding.
The former would be ill-advised and often impossible;
the latter, on occasion, may be prudent." (emphasis in
original)).
And such a declaration could create an immediate void
in educational funding that the General Assembly would
be required to remedy with new legislation. Such a
scenario would result in an anomalous situation, where,
in subsequent judicial proceedings concerning the
constitutionality of such new legislation, courts would
be constrained either to hold the legislation
constitutional or to void it. The latter holding would force
the process through yet another cycle.
The Rhode Island Supreme Court pointed out in City of
Pawtucket v. Sundlun, 662 A.2d 40, 59 (R.I. 1995):
Julianna Wade
Page 15 of 412
216 P.3d 29, *41; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **32
[T]he absence of justiciable standards could engage
the court in a morass comparable to the
decades-long struggle of the Supreme Court of
New Jersey . . . . [The] Court has struggled in
[**33] its self-appointed role as overseer of
education for more than twenty-one years,
consuming significant funds, fees, time, effort, and
court attention. The volume of litigation and the
extent of judicial oversight provide a chilling
example of the thickets that can entrap a court that
takes on the duties of a Legislature.
As noted, the New Jersey Supreme Court has struggled
for more than two decades to define what constitutes a
"thorough and efficient" education under its constitution.
See Abbott v. Burke, 136 N.J. 444, 643 A.2d 575 (N.J.
1994); Abbott v. Burke, 119 N.J. 287, 575 A.2d 359 (N.J.
1990); Abbott v. Burke, 100 N.J. 269, 495 A.2d 376
(N.J. 1985); Robinson v. Cahill, 360 A.2d 400, 70 N.J.
465 (N.J. 1976); Robinson v. Cahill, 70 N.J. 155, 358
A.2d 457 (N.J. 1976); Robinson v. Cahill, 69 N.J. 449,
355 A.2d 129 (N.J. 1976); Robinson v. Cahill, 69 N.J.
133, 351 A.2d 713 (N.J. 1975); Robinson v. Cahill, 67
N.J. 333, 339 A.2d 193 (N.J. 1975); Robinson v. Cahill,
67 N.J. 35, 335 A.2d 6 (N.J. 1975); Robinson v. Cahill,
63 N.J. 196, 306 A.2d 65 (N.J. 1973); Robinson v.
Cahill, 62 N.J. 473, 303 A.2d 273 (N.J. 1973).
We are cautioned by the experience of other courts that
have held such challenges to be justiciable but then
been unable to achieve prompt resolution.
The Texas Supreme Court has addressed whether its
school finance [**34] system is "efficient" under its
education clause six times since 1989. See Neeley v.

West Orange-Cove, 176 S.W.3d 746 (Tex. 2005); West
Orange Cove Consol. I.S.D. v. Alanis, 107 S.W.3d 558
(Tex. 2003); Edgewood Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Meno, 917
S.W.2d 717 (Tex. 1995); Carrollton-Farmers Branch
Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Edgewood Indep. Sch. Dist., 826
S.W.2d 489 [*42] (Tex. 1992); Edgewood Indep. Sch.
Dist. v. Kirby, 804 S.W.2d 491 (Tex. 1991).
Despite "issuing four decisions in this case over the
past nine years," the Alabama Supreme Court conceded
that "the pronouncement of a specific remedy 'from the
bench' would necessarily represent an exercise of the
power of that branch of government charged by the
people of the State of Alabama with the sole duty to
administer state funds to public schools: the Alabama
Legislature." Ex parte James, 836 So. 2d at 816-17.
Therefore, we agree with the Nebraska Supreme Court:
"The landscape is littered with courts that have been
bogged down in the legal quicksand of continuous
litigation and challenges to their states' school funding
systems. Unlike those courts, we refuse to wade into
that Stygian swamp." Heineman, 731 N.W.2d at 183.
Accordingly, we conclude that [**35] the parents' claims
were properly dismissed as a nonjusticiable political
question.
The judgment is affirmed.
JUDGE CASEBOLT and JUDGE TERRY concur.
[*43] Appendix A
Julianna Wade
State
Colorado
Issue/Claim
"The general
assembly shall
. . . provide for
the establishment and
maintenance
of a thorough
and uniform
system of free
public schools
throughout the
state . . . ."
Colo. Const.
art. IX, 2.
Ex parte
Review of an
order vacating
James, 836
the trial court's
So. 2d 813,
remedy plan
817, 819 (Ala.
2002)
requiring the
legislature to
formulate a
constitutional
system of
school
financing.
Constitutional Provision
Reasons
No
While it is the duty of

the courts to
determine what the
constitution requires,
"pronouncement of a
specific remedy 'from
the bench' would
necessarily
represent an
exercise of the
power of that branch
of government
charged by the
people of the State
of Alabama with the
sole duty to
administer state
funds to public
schools: the
Alabama
Legislature." "[W]e
now recognize that
any specific remedy
"The Legislature shall establish,

organize, and maintain a liberal
system of public schools
throughout the state for the
benefit of the children thereof
between the ages of seven and
twenty-one years." Ala.Const.
256 (version prior to
Amendment 111).
Fundamental
Right?
Page 16 of 412
Justiciable
216 P.3d 29, *43; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
Alabama
Case Name
Arkansas
Yes
216 P.3d 29, *43; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
Page 17 of 412
"[T]hat the
current school
funding
system is
unconstitutional
"Intelligence and virtue being
under the
the safeguards of liberty and
Education
the bulwark of a free and good
Article and the
government, the State shall
Equality
ever maintain a general,
Lake View
provisions."
suitable and efficient system of
School No. 25
free public schools and shall
v. Huckabee,
adopt all suitable means to
351 Ark. 31,
secure to the people the
91 S.W.3d
advantages and opportunities
472, 484-85
of education. The specific
(Ark. 2002)
intention of this amendment is
(quoting Rose
to authorize that in addition to
v. Council for
existing constitutional or
Better
statutory provisions the
Education,
General Assembly and/or
Inc., 790
public school districts may
S.W.2d 186,
spend public funds for the
208-10 (Ky.
education of persons over
1989)).
twenty-one (21) years of age
and under six (6) years of age,
as may be provided by law, and
no other interpretation shall be
that the judiciary

could impose would,
in order to be
effective, necessarily
involve a usurpation
of that power
entrusted exclusively
to the Legislature."
Unlike nonjusticiable
states' constitutions
which refer to the
general assembly,
"the Education
Article in the
Arkansas
Constitution
designates the State
as the entity to
maintain a general,
suitable, and efficient
system of free public
schools." And it is
the sole function of
the judiciary "to
apply, interpret,
define, and construe
all words, phrases,
sentences and
sections of the
[Arkansas]
Constitution as
necessitated by the
controversies before
it." Further, "This
court's refusal to
review school
funding under our
state constitution
would be a complete
abrogation of our
given to it." Ark. Const. art. XIV,

1.
judicial responsibility
and would work a
severe disservice to
the people of this
state. We refuse to
close our eyes or
turn a deaf ear to
claims of a
dereliction of duty in
the field of
education."
216 P.3d 29, *43; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
Page 18 of 412
"Adequate provision shall

be made by law for a
uniform, efficient, safe,
secure, and high quality
schools that allows students
to obtain a high quality
education and for the
establishment, maintenance,
and operation of institutions
of higher learning and other
public education programs
that the needs of the people
may require." Fla. Const. art.
IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *43; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 19 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
indirectly, in order
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
judicial intrusion."
In addressing the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 20 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"thorough" claim, the
court stated:

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 21 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"Mindful that . . . this
Court is not well

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 22 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
equipped to legislate
'in a turbulent field of

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 23 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
social, economic
and political policy' .

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 24 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
. . we decline to
accept the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 25 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
respondents'
argument that the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 26 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
other branches of
government be

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 27 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
allowed to interpret
the constitution for

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 28 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
us. That would be
an abject abdication

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 29 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
of our role in the
American system of

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 30 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
government."
"Passing on the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 31 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutionality of
statutory

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 32 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
enactments, even
enactment with
No
Page 33 of 412
"[T]hat the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
political overtones,
is a fundamental
current
No
Page 34 of 412
Idaho Schools

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
responsibility of the
judiciary." Further,
method of
funding the
No
Page 35 of 412
for Equal

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"Balancing our
constitutional duty to
Educational
Opportunity,
public schools
does not
"The stability of a republican
No
Page 36 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
define the meaning
of . . . thoroughness
provide either
form of government depending
a 'uniform'
No
Page 37 of 412
Inc. v. Evans,
123 Idaho 573,

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
. . . with the political
difficulties of that
850 P.2d 724,

728, 734 (Idaho
system or a
'thorough'
mainly upon the intelligence of

the people, it shall be the duty
No
Page 38 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
task has been made
simpler for this Court
1993) (quoting
Thompson v.
system and,
further,
of the legislature of Idaho, to

establish and maintain a
No
Page 39 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
because the
executive branch of
Engelking, 96
Idaho 793, 537
violates the
equal
general, uniform and thorough

system of public, free common
No
Page 40 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the government has
already promulgated
No
P.2d 635, 640

(Idaho 1975)).
protection
clause."
schools." Idaho Const. art. IX,

1.
Yes
Page 41 of 412
Idaho

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
educational
standards."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 42 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"[W]hat constitutes a
'high quality'

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 43 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
education cannot be
ascertained by any

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 44 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
judicially
discoverable or

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 45 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
manageable
standards and that

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 46 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the constitution
provides no

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 47 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
principled basis for a
judicial definition of

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 48 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
'high quality': 'It
would be a

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 49 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
transparent conceit
to suggest that

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 50 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
whatever standards
of quality courts

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 51 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
might develop would
actually be derived

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 52 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
from the constitution
in any meaningful

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 53 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
sense. Nor is
education a subject
No
Page 54 of 412
Lewis E. v.

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
within the judiciary's
field of expertise,
No
Page 55 of 412
Spagnolo, 186

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
such that a judicial
role in giving content
No
Page 56 of 412
Ill. 2d 198, 238

Ill. Dec. 1, 710

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
to the education
guarantee might be
"The State shall provide for an
No
Page 57 of 412
N.E.2d 798,
802 (Ill. 1999)

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
warranted. Rather,
the question of
"[W]hether the efficient system of high quality
No
Page 58 of 412
(quoting
Committee for

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
educational quality
is inherently one of
Educational
Rights v. Edgar,
plaintiffs may
public educational institutions

and services. Education in
No
Page 59 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
policy involving
philosophical and
174 Ill. 2d 1,
220 Ill. Dec.
state a cause
of action under
public schools through the

secondary level shall be free.
No
Page 60 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
practical
considerations that
166, 672
N.E.2d 1178,
the education
article of our
There may be such other free

education as the General
No
Page 61 of 412
[*45]

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
call for the exercise
of legislative and
No
1191 (Ill.
1996)).
state
constitution."
Assembly provides by law." Ill

Const. art. X, 1.
No
Page 62 of 412
Illinois

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
administrative
discretion.'"

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 63 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"The judiciary
interprets, explains,

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 64 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
and applies the law
to controversies

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 65 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
concerning rights,
wrongs, duties, and

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 66 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
obligations arising
under the law and

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 67 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
has had imposed
upon it the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 68 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
obligations of
interpreting the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 69 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Constitution and of
safeguarding the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 70 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
basic rights reserved
thereby to the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 71 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
people. In this
sphere of

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 72 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
responsibility, courts
have no power to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 73 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
overturn the law
enacted by the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 74 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
legislature within
constitutional

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 75 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
limitations, even
though the law may

IX, 1(a).
Page 76 of 412
"Local public schools under
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
be unwise, impolitic,
or unjust. The

IX, 1(a).
Page 77 of 412
the general supervision of the

state board of education shall
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
remedy in such a
case lies with the

IX, 1(a).
Page 78 of 412
be maintained, developed and

operated by locally elected
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
people through the
political process." "It

IX, 1(a).
Page 79 of 412
boards. When authorized by

law, such boards may make
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
is well settled that
courts should not
"[P]laintiffs,
and carry out agreements for

cooperative operation and
No
Page 80 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
substitute judicial
judgment for
including
unified school
administration of educational
programs under the general
No
Page 81 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
educational
decisions and

IX, 1(a).
Page 82 of 412
districts,
supervision of the state board
taxpayers, and
of education, but such
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
standards. . . .
Hence, the court will
Unified School
students,
challenge the
agreements shall be subject to

limitation, change or
No
Page 83 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
not substitute its
judgment of what is
constitutionality termination by the legislature."

Kan. Const. art. VI, 5. AND
of the School
No
Page 84 of 412
Dist. No. 229 v.

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
suitable, but will
utilize as a base the
State, 256 Kan.

232, 885 P.2d
District
Finance and
"The legislature shall make

suitable provision for finance
No
Page 85 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
standards
enunciated by the
No
1170, 1172-73,
1186 (Kan.
Quality
Performance
of the educational interests of

the state." Kan. Const. art. VI,
Yes
Page 86 of 412
Kansas

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
legislature and the
state department of
1994).
Act."
6(b).
No
Page 87 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
education."
"[W]e are asked --

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 88 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
based solely on the
evidence in the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 89 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
record before us -- if
the present system
No
Page 90 of 412
"[W]hether the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
of common schools
in Kentucky is
No
Page 91 of 412
Kentucky

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
'efficient' in the
constitutional sense.
No
Page 92 of 412
General
Assembly has

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
It is our sworn duty,
to decide such
No
Page 93 of 412
complied with
its

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
questions when they
are before us by
No
Page 94 of 412
constitutional
mandate to

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
applying the
constitution." In
Rose v. Council
'provide an
efficient
"The General Assembly shall,
No
Page 95 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
contrast, "To allow
the General
for Better
Education, Inc.,
system of
common
by appropriate legislation,
provide for an efficient system
No
Page 96 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Assembly . . . to
decide whether its
No
790 S.W.2d
186, 189, 209
schools
throughout the
of common schools
throughout the State." Ky.
Yes
Yes
Page 97 of 412
[*46]

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
actions are
constitutional is
(Ky. 1989)
state.'
Const. 183.
No
Page 98 of 412
Kentucky

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
literally unthinkable."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 99 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"If the mandate of
the Constitution is

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 100 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
not met, or if a
statutory structure

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 101 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
which worked at one
time no longer

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 102 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
works, the
responsibility for the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 103 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
failure to educate
falls squarely on the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 104 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Commonwealth,
specifically the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 105 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
'legislatures and
magistrates.' They

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 106 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
may delegate, but
they may not

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 107 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
abdicate, their
constitutional duty.

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 108 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
'Without in any way
attempting to invade

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 109 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the rightful province
of the Legislature to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 110 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
conduct its own
business, we have

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 111 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the duty . . . to
adjudicate a claim

IX, 1(a).
Page 112 of 412
"[I]t shall be the duty of
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that a law and the
actions undertaken

IX, 1(a).
Page 113 of 412
legislatures and magistrates . .
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
pursuant to that law
conflict with [or fall

IX, 1(a).
Page 114 of 412
. to cherish the interests of

literature and the sciences,
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
short of] the
requirements of the

IX, 1(a).
Page 115 of 412
and all seminaries of them;

especially the university at
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Constitution.'" The
court then

IX, 1(a).
Page 116 of 412
Cambridge, public schools

and grammar schools in the
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
articulated "broad
guidelines" and

IX, 1(a).
Page 117 of 412
towns; to encourage private

societies and public
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
assumed "that the
Commonwealth will

IX, 1(a).
Page 118 of 412
institutions, rewards and

immunities, for the promotion
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
fulfill its duty to
remedy the
McDuffy v.
"[T]he State's
of agriculture, arts, sciences,

commerce, trades,
No
Page 119 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutional
violations that we
manufactures, and a natural

history of this country; to
No
Page 120 of 412
Secretary, 415 school-financing

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
have identified." The
court noted: "we
Mass. 545, 615

N.E.2d 516,
system
effectively
countenance and inculcate the

principles of humanity and
No
Page 121 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
leave it to the
magistrates and the
517, 550, 553,

555 (Mass.
denies them
the opportunity
general benevolence, public

and private charity, industry
No
Page 122 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Legislatures to
define the precise
1993) (quoting
Colo v. Trea-
to receive an
adequate
and frugality, honesty and

punctuality in their dealings;
No
Page 123 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
nature of the task
which they face in
surer, 378
Mass. 550, 392
education in
the public
sincerity, good humour, and all

social affections, and
No
Page 124 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
fulfilling their
No
N.E.2d 1195,
1197 (Mass.
schools in
their
generous sentiments among

the people. Mass. Const. pt.
Yes
Page 125 of 412
Massachusetts

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
educate our children
today, and in the
App.Ct. 1979)).
communities."
II(C)(5), 2.
No
Yes: "In this
Page 126 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
future."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Page 127 of 412
case, the
requirement

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Page 128 of 412
that the
Legislature

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Page 129 of 412
shall provide
a basic

IX, 1(a).
system of
free quality
Page 130 of 412
"(1)It is the goal of the people
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify

IX, 1(a).
public
schools, must
Page 131 of 412
to establish a system of
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify

IX, 1(a).
"Since the Public
be read in
conjunction
Page 132 of 412
education which will develop

the full educational potential of
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify

IX, 1(a).
Schools Clause is
with Section
1 of Article X,
Page 133 of 412
each person. Equality of

educational opportunity is
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify

IX, 1(a).
Page 134 of 412
guaranteed to each person of

the state. (2) The state
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
non-self-executing,
which
it presents a political guarantees a

IX, 1(a).
right to
education."
Page 135 of 412
recognizes the distinct and

unique cultural heritage of the
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
question which, in
the first instance, is

IX, 1(a).
Further, the
court noted:
Page 136 of 412
American Indians and is

committed in its educational
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
directed to the
Legislature and is

IX, 1(a).
Page 137 of 412
goals to the preservation of

their cultural integrity. (3) The
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
non-justiciable. That "As the final
determination,
guardian and

IX, 1(a).
protector of
the right to
Page 138 of 412
legislature shall provide a

basic system of free quality
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
however, does not
end the inquiry. As

IX, 1(a).
education, it
is incumbent
Page 139 of 412
public elementary and

secondary schools. The
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
here, (1) once the
Legislature has
"[T]he State
legislature may provide such

other educational institutions,
No
upon the
court to
Page 140 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
acted, or 'executed,'
a provision (2) that
public libraries, and

educational programs as it
No
assure that
the system
Page 141 of 412
has acted
Columbia Falls
unconstitutionally

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
implicates individual
constitutional rights,
Elementary
in
administering
deems desirable. It shall fund

and distribute in an equitable
No
enacted by
the
Page 142 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
courts can
determine whether
School District
No. 6 v. State,
and funding
Montana's
manner to the school districts

the state's share of the cost of
No
Legislature
enforces,
Page 143 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that enactment
fulfills the
109 P.3d
constitutionally-mandated
257,
259-61 (Mont.
public school
No
the basic elementary and

secondary school system."
Yes
protects and
fulfills the
Page 144 of 412
[*47]

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Legislature's
constitutional
2005).
system."
Mont. Const. art. X, 1.
No
right."
Page 145 of 412
Montana

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
responsibility."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 146 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"The Nebraska
Constitution

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 147 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
commits the issue of
providing free

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 148 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
instruction to the
Legislature and fails

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 149 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
to provide judicially
discernible and

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 150 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
manageable
standards for

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 151 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
determining what
level of public

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 152 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
education the
Legislature must

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 153 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
provide." In
discussing the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 154 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
second prong of
Baker, the court

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 155 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
noted that the
"people rejected a

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 156 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
recent amendment
that would have

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 157 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
imposed qualitative
standards on the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 158 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Legislature's duty to
provide public

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 159 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
education." That
amendment "would

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 160 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
have made a
thorough and

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 161 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
efficient education
... the paramount

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 162 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
duty of the state.
The court also noted

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 163 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that the "framers of
the 1875

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 164 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitution
intentionally omitted

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 165 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
any language . . .
that would have

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 166 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
placed restrictions or
qualitative standards

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 167 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
on the Legislature's
duties regarding

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 168 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
education" by
rejecting the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 169 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
thorough and
efficient language

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 170 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
found in many other
states' constitutions.

IX, 1(a).
Page 171 of 412
"The Legislature shall provide
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Thus, the court
stated, "We interpret
Nebraska
Plaintiffs
for the free instruction in the
No
Page 172 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the paucity of
standards in the free
Coalition for
Educational
"alleged that
common schools of this state

of all persons between the
No
Page 173 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
instruction clause as
the framers' intent to
Equity &
Adequacy v.
the funding
system does
ages of five and twenty-one

years. The Legislature may
No
Page 174 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
commit the
determination of
provide for the education of

other persons in educational
No
Page 175 of 412
Heineman, 273
not provide
Neb. 531, 731 sufficient funds

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
adequate school
funding solely to the
N.W.2d 164,
169, 171, 180,
for an
'adequate' and
institutions owned and

controlled by the state or a
No
Page 176 of 412
[*48]

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Legislature's
discretion, greater
No
183 (Neb.
2007).
'quality'
education."
political subdivision thereof."

Neb. Const. art. VII, 1.
No
Page 177 of 412
Nebraska

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
resources, and
expertise."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 178 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
The court
interpreted the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 179 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Education Clause
and determined that

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 180 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
there is a duty "that
the State provide an

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 181 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
education to all its
citizens and that it

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 182 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
support all public
schools." And this

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 183 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
duty "extends
beyond mere

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 184 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
reading, writing and
arithmetic. It also

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 185 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
includes broad
educational

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 186 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
opportunities
needed in today's

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 187 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
society to prepare
citizens for their role

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 188 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
as participants and
as potential

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 189 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
competitors in
today's marketplace

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 190 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
of ideas." However,
the court went on to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 191 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
state: "We do not
define the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 192 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
parameters of the
education mandated

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 193 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
by the constitution
as that task is, in the

IX, 1(a).
Page 194 of 412
"Knowledge and learning,
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
first instance, for the
legislature and the

IX, 1(a).
Page 195 of 412
generally diffused through a

community, being essential to
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Governor." And "We
are confident that

IX, 1(a).
Page 196 of 412
the preservation of a free

government; and spreading
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the legislature and
the Governor will

IX, 1(a).
Page 197 of 412
the opportunities and

advantages of education
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
fulfill their
responsibility with
Does the N.H.
through the various parts of

the country, being highly
No
Page 198 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
respect to defining
the specifics of, and
Claremont
Constitution
conducive to promote this end;

it shall be the duty of the
No
Page 199 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the appropriate
means to provide
impose a duty legislators and magistrates, in

on the State to
all future periods of this
No
Page 200 of 412
School District
v. Governor,

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
through public
education, the
138 N.H. 183,

provide
635 A.2d 1375, constitutionally
government, to cherish the

interest of literature and the
No
Page 201 of 412
New

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
knowledge and
learning essential to
No
1381 (N.H.
1993)
adequate
education?
sciences . . . ." N.H. Const. pt.

II, art. 83.
Yes
Page 202 of 412
Hampshire

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the preservation of a
free government."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 203 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
The issue of
justiciability was not

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 204 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
specifically
addressed.

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 205 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
However, the court
noted that while

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 206 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
deference should be
given to legislative

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 207 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
content and
performance

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 208 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
standards, it is still
the courts' duty "to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 209 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
determine whether
the new approach

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 210 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
encompassing
content and
No
Page 211 of 412
"Plaintiffs

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
performance
standards, together
No
Page 212 of 412
contend that

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
with funding
measures, comports
No
Page 213 of 412
recently-enacted
legislation, the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
with the
constitutional

IX, 1(a).
Throughout
Page 214 of 412
Comprehensive
"The Legislature shall provide
Educational
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
guarantee of a
thorough and
Improvement
and Financing
for the maintenance and

support of a thorough and
No
the opinion,
Page 215 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
efficient education
for all New Jersey
Abbott v. Burke,
Act of 1996,
fails to assure
efficient system of free public

schools for the instruction of
No
the court
refers to
Page 216 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
school children. The
standards
149 N.J. 145,

693 A.2d 417,
them a
thorough and
all the children in the State

between the ages of five and
No
Page 217 of 412
[*49] New

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
themselves do not education as
ensure any
a
420, 428 (N.J.

1997).
efficient
education."
eighteen years." N.J. Const.

art. VIII, 4.
No
Yes
Page 218 of 412
Jersey

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
substantive level of constitutional
achievement."
right."
No
Whether the claim
Page 219 of 412
That the
State's public

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
school
financing
No
Page 220 of 412
Campaign for

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
was justiciable was
not argued, nor
Fiscal Equity,
system is
unconstitutional
The legislature shall provide
No
Page 221 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
addressed
specifically by the
Inc. v. State, 86
N.Y.2d 307,
under the
Education
for the maintenance and
No
Page 222 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
court. However, the
court noted:"We
631 N.Y.S.2d
565, 655
Article of the
State Constitu-
support of a system of free

common schools, wherein all
No
Page 223 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
conclude that a duty
exists and that we
No
N.E.2d 661,
665 (N.Y.
tion and the

Equal Protec-
the children of this state may

be educated. N.Y. Const. art.
Yes
Page 224 of 412
New York

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
are responsible for
adjudicating the
tion Clause.
XI, 1.
"The people have a right to the
No
Page 225 of 412
1995).

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
nature of that duty."
"[T]hat
privilege of education, and it is

the duty of the State to guard
No
Page 226 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
[plaintiffs] have
and maintain that right." N.C.

Const art. I, 15. And "The
No
Page 227 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
a right to
adequate
General Assembly shall

provide by taxation and
No
"When a
"The right to
Page 228 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
educational
opportunities
otherwise for a general and

uniform system of free public
No
government action
a free public
Page 229 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Leandro v.
which is being
denied them
schools, which shall be

maintained at least nine
No
education is
explicitly
Page 230 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
is challenged as
unconstitutional, the
months in every year, and

wherein equal opportunities
No
guaranteed
by the North
Page 231 of 412
State, 346 N.C. by defendants

336, 488
under the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
courts have a duty
to determine
No
S.E.2d 249,
252-54 (N.C.
current school
funding
shall be provided for all

students." N.C. Const. art. IX,
Yes
Page 232 of 412
North

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
whether that action
Carolina
exceeds
Constitution .
1997).
system."
2(1).
No
. . ."
Page 233 of 412
Carolina

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutional limits."
"Under the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 234 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
long-standing
doctrine of judicial

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 235 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
review, it is our
sworn duty to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 236 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
determine whether
the General

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 237 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Assembly has
enacted legislation

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 238 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that is constitutional
. . . We are aware

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 239 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that the General
Assembly has the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 240 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
responsibility to
enact legislation and

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 241 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that such legislation
is presumptively

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 242 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
valid . . . However,
this does not mean

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 243 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that we may turn a
deaf ear to any

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 244 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
challenge to laws
passed by the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 245 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
General Assembly.
The presumption

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 246 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
that laws are
constitutional is

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 247 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
rebuttable. . . . The
judiciary was

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 248 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
created as part of a
system of checks

IX, 1(a).
Page 249 of 412
"The general assembly shall
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
and balances. We
will not dodge our

IX, 1(a).
Page 250 of 412
make such provisions, by

taxation, or otherwise, as, with
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
responsibility by
asserting that this

IX, 1(a).
Page 251 of 412
the income arising from the

school trust fund, will secure a
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
case involves a
nonjusticiable
DeRolph v.
Plaintiffs
thorough and efficient system

of common schools
No
Page 252 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
political question. To
do so is unthinkable.
State, 78 Ohio
sought "a
determination
throughout the State; but, no

religious or other sect, or
No
Page 253 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
We refuse to
undermine our role
St. 3d 193,
1997 Ohio 84,
that Ohio's
system of
sects, shall ever have any

exclusive right to, or control of,
No
Page 254 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
as judicial arbiters
and to pass our
No
677 N.E.2d
733, 734, 737
funding public
education is
any part of the school funds of

this state." Ohio Const. art. VI,
Yes
No
Page 255 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
responsibilities onto
the lap of the
(Ohio 1997). unconstitutional"
2.
No
Page 256 of 412
[*50] Ohio

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
General Assembly."
Oklahoma
"[B]y
Education Ass'n inadequately
The Legislature shall

establish and maintain a
No
Page 257 of 412
Oklahoma

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"The legislature has
the exclusive
funding
education
system of free public schools

wherein all the children of the
No
Page 258 of 412
v. State, 2007
OK 30, 158

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
authority to declare
the fiscal policy of
[defendants]
are . . .
State may be educated. Okla.

Const. art. XIII, 1.
No
Page 259 of 412
P.3d 1058,
1062, 1066

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Oklahoma limited
only by
depriving
Oklahoma
"Provisions shall be made for

the establishment and
No
Page 260 of 412
(Okla. 2007).

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutional
prohibitions. . . . The
school
children of a
maintenance of a system of
public schools, which shall be
No
Page 261 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
plaintiffs have failed
to provide us with
constitutional
right to a
open to all the children of the

state and free from sectarian
No
Page 262 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
any applicable
limitations. The
uniform
opportunity to
control; and said schools shall

always be conducted in
No
Page 263 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
plaintiffs are
attempting to
receive a
basic,
English: Provided, that nothing

herein shall preclude the
No
Page 264 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
circumvent the
legislative process
adequate
education."
teaching of other languages in

said public schools." Okla.
No
Page 265 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
by having this Court
interfere with and

IX, 1(a).
Page 266 of 412
Const. art. V, 1.
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
control the
Legislature's domain

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 267 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
of making
fiscal-policy

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 268 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
decisions and of
setting educational

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 269 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
policy by imposing
mandates on the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 270 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Legislature and by
continuing to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 271 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
monitor and oversee
the Legislature. To

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 272 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
do as the plaintiffs
ask would require

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 273 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
this Court to invade
the Legislature's

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 274 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
power to determine
policy. This we are

IX, 1(a).
No
Page 275 of 412
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutionally
prohibited from

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 276 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
doing."
Because of a lack

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 277 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
of judicially
manageable

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 278 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
standards for
resolving the instant

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 279 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
claims, . . . it would
be impossible to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 280 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
resolve the claims
without making an

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 281 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
initial policy
determination of a

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 282 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
kind which is clearly
of legislative, and

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 283 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
not judicial,
discretion. Thus,

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 284 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"Even were this
Court to attempt to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 285 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
define the specific
components of a

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 286 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
'thorough and
efficient education'

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 287 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
in a manner which
would foresee the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 288 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
needs of the future,
the only judicially
No
Page 289 of 412
"[T]hat the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
manageable
standard this court
No
Page 290 of 412
General

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
could adopt would
be the rigid rule that
No
Page 291 of 412
Assembly
violated the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
each pupil must
receive the same
No
Page 292 of 412
Pennsylvania
Constitution by

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
dollar expenditures.
. . . [H]owever, . . .
No
Page 293 of 412
failing to
provide

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
expenditures are not
the exclusive
No
Page 294 of 412
adequate
funding for the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
yardstick of
educational quality,
No
Page 295 of 412
Philadelphia
School District

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
or even of
educational quantity.
No
Page 296 of 412
in violation of
[the obligation]

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
. . . The educational
product is
to 'provide for
the
"The General Assembly shall
No
Page 297 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
dependent upon
many factors,
Marrero v.
maintenance
and support of
provide for the maintenance
No
Page 298 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
including the
wisdom of the
Commonwealth, 559 Pa.
a thorough
and efficient
and support of a thorough and

efficient system of public
No
Page 299 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
expenditures as well
as the efficiency and
No
14, 739 A.2d

110, 111-113
system of
public
education to serve the needs

of the Commonwealth." Pa.
No
Page 300 of 412
[*51]

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
economy with which
available resources
(Pa. 1999).
education.'
Const. art. III, 14.
No
Page 301 of 412
Pennsylvania

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
are utilized."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 302 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"[P]laintiffs have
asked the judicial

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 303 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
branch to enforce
policies for which

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 304 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
there are no
judicially

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 305 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
manageable
standards." [I]t is

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 306 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
not within the power
or province of

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 307 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
members of the
Judiciary to advance

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 308 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
their own personal
wishes or to

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 309 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
implement their own
personal notions of

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 310 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
fairness under the
guise of
"The diffusion of knowledge,
No
Page 311 of 412
City of Paw-

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutional
interpretation. The
as well as of virtue among the

people, being essential to the
No
Page 312 of 412
tucket v.

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
quantity and quality
of educational
Sundlun, 662
A.2d 40, 58-59
Plaintiffs
preservation of their rights and

liberties, it shall be the duty of
No
Page 313 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
opportunities to be
made available to
(R.I. 1995)
(quoting
sought a
declaratory
the general assembly to

promote public schools and
No
Page 314 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the State's public
school children is a
Hornbeck v.
Somerset
judgment that
the state's
public libraries, and to adopt

all means which it may deem
No
Page 315 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
determination
committed to the
County Board
of Education,
method of
funding public
necessary and proper to

secure to the people the
No
Page 316 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
legislature or to the
people . . . through
education was advantages and opportunities

violative of the of education and public library
No
Page 317 of 412
295 Md. 597,

458 A.2d 758,

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
adoption of an
appropriate
No
790 (R.I.
1983)).
Rhode Island
Constitution.
services." R.I. Const. art. XII,

1.
No
Yes
Page 318 of 412
Rhode Island

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
amendment to the
State Constitution.

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 319 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Relying on the
principle that "It is

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 320 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the duty of this
Court to interpret

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 321 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
and declare the
meaning of the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 322 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Constitution," the
court defined the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 323 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"minimally adequate
education required

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 324 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
by our Constitution."
Further, the court

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 325 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
stated: "We
recognize that we

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 326 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
are not experts in
education, and we
"Essentially,
"The General Assembly shall
No
Page 327 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
do not intend to
dictate the programs
South Carolina
they allege
that the
provide for the maintenance
No
Page 328 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
utilized in our public
schools. Instead, we
Abbeville
system is
underfunded,
and support of a system of

free public schools open to all
No
Page 329 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
have defined, within
deliberately broad
County School
Dist. v. State,
resulting in a
violation of the
children in the State and shall

establish, organize and
No
Page 330 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
parameters, the
outlines of the
335 S.C. 58,

515 S.E.2d
state
Constitution's
support such other public

institutions of learning, as may
No
Page 331 of 412
South

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitution's
requirement of
No
535, 537, 540

(S.C. 1999).
education
clause . . . ."
be desirable." S.C. Const. art.

XI, 3.
Yes
Page 332 of 412
Carolina

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
minimally adequate
education."
"[T]hat the
public school
"A general diffusion of

knowledge being essential to
No
Yes
Page 333 of 412
[*52] Texas Neeley v. West

Orange-Cove

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
The Education
Clause "imposes on
Consolidated
Independent
system cannot
achieve '[a]
the preservation of the

liberties and rights of the
No
Page 334 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the legislature an
affirmative duty to
School District,
176 S.W.3d
general
diffusion of
people, it shall be the duty of

the Legislature of the State to
No
Page 335 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
establish and
provide for the
746, 752,
776-77 (Tx.
knowledge' as
required by
establish and make suitable

provision for the support and
No
Page 336 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
public free schools."
However, this duty
article VII,
section 1 of
maintenance of an efficient
system of public free schools."
No
Page 337 of 412
2005)

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"is not committed
unconditionally to
Tex. Const. art. VII, 1.
No
Page 338 of 412
the Texas
Constitution,

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the legislature's
discretion, but
No
Page 339 of 412
because the
system is

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
instead is
accompanied by
No
Page 340 of 412
underfunded."

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
standards," i.e.
"suitable,"

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 341 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"essential," and
"efficient." Thus,

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 342 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
while "the
Legislature has the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 343 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
sole right to decide
how to meet the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 344 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
standards . . . the
Judiciary has the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 345 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
final authority to
determine whether

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 346 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
they have been
met."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 347 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"Our review of the
record and the briefs

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 348 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
compels us to
conclude that the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 349 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Legislature, the
Attorney General,

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 350 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
school districts and
the people of this

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 351 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
State are uncertain
as to the meaning

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 352 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
and application of
[the education

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 353 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
clause]. They, as
well as the impacted

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 354 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
public school
children, will benefit

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 355 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
from a clarification of
the applicable

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Yes: "all
Page 356 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutional and
statutory

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
children
residing
Page 357 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
provisions." And
"Deciding whether a

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
within the
State's
Page 358 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
matter has in any
measure been

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 359 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
committed by the
borders have
Constitution to
a right to be
No
Page 360 of 412
"[T]hat the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
another branch of
amply
government, or
provided with
No
Page 361 of 412
State's

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
whether the action an education.
of that branch
That right is

IX, 1(a).
Page 362 of 412
reliance on
"It is the paramount duty of the
special excess
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
exceeds whatever constitutionally
authority has been
paramount
levy funding
state to make ample provision
for discharging
No
and must be
achieved
Page 363 of 412
Seattle School

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
committed, is itself a
delicate exercise in
its duty to
for the education of all children
provide for the
residing within its borders,
No
through a
general and
Page 364 of 412
Dist. No. 1 v.

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
constitutional
interpretation, and is
State, 90
Wn.2d 476, 585
education of
resident
without distinction or
preference on account of race,
No
uniform
system of
Page 365 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
a responsibility of
this Court as
P.2d 71, 80, 84 children was

(Wash. 1978). unconstitutional."
No
color, caste, or sex." Wash.

Const. art. IX, 1.
Yes
public
schools.
Page 366 of 412
Washington

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
ultimate interpreter
of the Constitution."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 367 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
After reviewing
decisions from other
No
Page 368 of 412
That the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
jurisdictions, noting
the deference courts
No
Page 369 of 412
system for

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
give to legislatively
promulgated
No
Page 370 of 412
financing
public schools

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
education policies
but stating that
No
Page 371 of 412
violates West
Virginia

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
these jurisdictions
have not hesitated
No
Page 372 of 412
Constitution by
denying

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
to examine
legislative
No
Yes:
Page 373 of 412
plaintiffs the
thorough and

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
performance of the
[constitutional]
Pauley v. Kelly,
efficient
education
"The legislature shall provide,
No
Page 374 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
mandate, and we
"education is
think properly so,
162 W. Va. 672,
required and
by denying
by general law, for a thorough
No
a
fundamental
Page 375 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
even as they recite
that courts are not
No
255 S.E.2d
859, 870
them equal
protection of
and efficient system of free

schools." W. Va. Const. art.
Yes
Page 376 of 412
West Virginia

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
concerned with the constitutional
wisdom or policy of
right in this
(W.Va. 1979).
the law.
XII, 1.
No
State."
Page 377 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the legislation."
"This court on

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 378 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
numerous occasions
has interpreted the

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 379 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
state constitution to
find that assessing

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 380 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the constitutionality
of the state school

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 381 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
finance system is
within its province."

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 382 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
And "We are
satisfied that the

IX, 1(a).
Page 383 of 412
"The legislature shall provide
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
issues presented to
us in this case are

IX, 1(a).
Page 384 of 412
by law for the establishment of
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
appropriate for
decision by this
"[W]hether the
district schools, which shall be

as nearly uniform as
No
Yes: "We
Page 385 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
court in the exercise
of our constitutional
state school
practicable; and such schools

shall be free and without
No
further hold
Page 386 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
role. This is an area
where all three of
finance
system is
charge for tuition to all children

between the ages of 4 and 20
No
that
Wisconsin
Page 387 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the co-equal
branches of state
Vincent v.
unconstitutional
under . . . the
years; and no sectarian

instruction shall be allowed
No
students
have a
Page 388 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
government share
power and authority
Voight, 2000 WI
uniformity
clause of the
therein; but the legislature by

law may, for the purpose of
No
fundamental
right to an
Page 389 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
consistent with the
Wisconsin
religious instruction outside

the district schools, authorize
No
equal
opportunity
Page 390 of 412
93, 236 Wis. 2d

education
588, 614
article; and . . .

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
Constitution. It is
indeed 'a delicate
No
N.W.2d 388,
396 & n.2 (Wis.
the Equal
Protection
the release of students during

regular school hours." Wis.
Yes
for a sound
basic
Page 391 of 412
[*53]

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
exercise in
constitutional
2000).
Clause."
Const. art. X, 3.
No
education."
Page 392 of 412
Wisconsin

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
interpretation.'

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 393 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
"Constitutional
provisions imposing

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 394 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
an affirmative
mandatory duty

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 395 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
upon the legislature
are judicially

IX, 1(a).
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
Page 396 of 412
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
enforceable in
protecting individual

IX, 1(a).
Page 397 of 412
"The legislature shall provide
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
rights, such as
educational rights. .

IX, 1(a).
Page 398 of 412
for the establishment and
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
. . Although this
court has said the

IX, 1(a).
Page 399 of 412
maintenance of a complete
and uniform system of public
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
judiciary will not
encroach into the

IX, 1(a).
Page 400 of 412
instruction, embracing free

elementary schools of every
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
legislative field of
policy making, as

IX, 1(a).
Page 401 of 412
needed kind and grade, a

university with such technical
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the final authority on
constitutional
"[C]ertain
and professional departments

as the public good may
No
Page 402 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
questions the
judiciary has the
components of
the Wyoming
require and the means of the

state allow, and such other
No
Page 403 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
declare
public school
finance
institutions as may be
necessary." Wyo. Const. art.
No
Page 404 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
unconstitutional that
which transgresses

IX, 1(a).
"The
Page 405 of 412
system were
7, 1. "The legislature shall
unconstitutional make such further provision by
No
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
the state
constitution. . . .
under the
Equal Protec-
taxation or otherwise, as with

the income arising from the
No
fundamental
Page 406 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
When the
legislature's
tion Section of general school fund will create

the Wyoming
and maintain a thorough and
No
right of
education
Page 407 of 412
Campbell

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
transgression is a
failure to act, our
efficient system of public

schools, adequate to the
No
expressly
recognized
Page 408 of 412
County School Constitution . .

District v. State,
. and the

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
duty to protect
individual rights
907 P.2d 1238,

1243-44, 1257,
Education
Article of the
proper instruction of all youth

of the state, between the ages
No
by the
Wyoming
Page 409 of 412

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
includes compelling
legislative action
No
1264 (Wyo.
1995).
Wyoming
Constitution. "
of six and twenty-one years . .

. ." Wyo. Const. art. 7, 9.
Yes
Page 410 of 412
Wyoming

IX, 1(a).
216 P.3d 29, *44; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
Julianna Wade
[*44]
Florida
Coalition for
Adequacy &
Fairness in
School
Funding, Inc.
v. Chiles, 680
So. 2d 400,
402, 406-07
(Fla. 1996).
"State has
failed to
provide its
students [the]
fundamental
right [of
education] by
failing to
allocate
adequate
resources for
a uniform
system of
free public
schools as
provided for
in the Florida
Constitution."
"To decide such an

abstract question
of 'adequate'
funding, the courts
would necessarily
be required to
subjectively
evaluate the
Legislature's value
judgments as to
the spending
priorities to be
assigned to the
state's many
needs, education
being one among
them. In short, the
Court would have
to usurp and
oversee the
appropriations
power, either
directly or
to grant the relief
sought by
Plaintiffs." Thus,
"We conclude that
here, especially in
view of our
obligation to
respect the
separation of
powers doctrine,
an insufficient
showing has been
made to justify
required by the
Constitution .
constitution."
. . ."
Page 411 of 412

216 P.3d 29, *54; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
[*54] Appendix B
State
Idaho
Minnesota
Montana
New Jersey
New Jersey
Case Name
Definition of Thorough
"Balancing our constitutional duty to define the
meaning of . . . thoroughness . . . with the
political difficulties of that task has been made
simpler for this Court because the executive
branch of the government has already
Idaho Schools for Equal Educational
promulgated educational standards . . . . We
have examined those standards carefully and
Opportunity v. Evans, 123 Idaho 573, 850
now hold that, under art. 9, 1, the requirements
P.2d 724, 734 (Idaho 1993).
for school facilities, instructional programs and
textbooks, and transportation systems as
contained in those regulations presently in
effect, are consistent with our view of
thoroughness."
"'[T]he Legislature shall make such provisions . .
Associated Schools v. School District No. . as will secure a thorough and efficient system
83, 122 Minn. 254, 142 N.W. 325, 327
of public schools . . . .' The object of these
(Minn. 1913) (quoting Minn. Const. art. 8,
provisions is to insure a regular method
3(1857) , and Board of Education v.
throughout the state, whereby all may be
enabled to acquire an education which will fit
Moore, 17 Minn. 412, 416, 17 Gilf. 391
(1871)).
them to discharge intelligently their duties as
citizens of the republic.'"
"What, then, constitutes a 'thorough' system of
education in our public schools? . . . [I]t is clear
that the solemn mandate of the Constitution is
not discharged by the mere training of the mind;
McNair v. School District No. 1, 87 Mont.
mentality without physical well-being does not
423, 288 P. 188, 190 (Mont. 1930).
make for good citizenship -- the good citizen, the
man or woman who is of the greatest value to
the state, is the one whose every faculty is
developed and alert."
The legislature promulgated and adopted
substantive standards that define a thorough
and efficient education: "The substantive
requirements are specified by the core
Abbott v. Burke, 149 N.J. 145, 693 A.2d
curriculum content standards (content standards
417, 425 (N.J. 1997).
or standards), and are intended to implement the
thoroughness component of the constitutionally
mandated thorough and efficient education." The
court deferred to these standards.
"The word thorough in the Education Clause
Robinson v. Cahill, 118 N.J. Super. 223,
connotes in common meaning the concept of
287 A.2d 187, 211 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law
completeness and attention to detail. It means
Div. 1972).
more than simply adequate or minimal. "
The Ohio Supreme Court construed the words
thorough and efficient in light of the
constitutional debates and history surrounding
them. The court stated: This declaration is
made by the people of the state. It calls for the
upbuilding of a system of schools throughout the
state, and the attainment of efficiency and
thoroughness in that system is thus expressly
Julianna Wade
Page 412 of 412

216 P.3d 29, *54; 2008 Colo. App. LEXIS 69, **35
State
Ohio
West Virginia
Wyoming
Case Name
Definition of Thorough
made a purpose, not local, not municipal, but
state-wide. With this very purpose in view,
regarding the problem as a state-wide problem,
the sovereign people made it mandatory upon
DeRolph v. State, 78 Ohio St. 3d 193,
the General Assembly to secure not merely a
system of common schools, but a system
1997 Ohio 84, 677 N.E.2d 733, 741 (Ohio
1997) (quoting Miller v. Korns, 107 Ohio
thorough and efficient throughout the state. A
thorough system could not mean one in which
St. 287, 1 Ohio Law Abs. 308, 140 N.E.
773, 776 (Ohio 1923)).
part or any number of the school districts of the
state were starved for funds. An efficient system
could not mean one in which part or any number
of the school districts of the state lacked
teachers, buildings, or equipment.
"It develops, as best the state of education
expertise allows, the minds, bodies and social
Pauley v. Kelly, 162 W. Va. 672, 255
morality of its charges to prepare them for useful
S.E.2d 859, 877 (W.Va. 1979).
and happy occupations, recreation and
citizenship, and does so economically."
To define thorough, the Wyoming Supreme
Court relied on (1) statements by its territorial
governors; (2) statutes enacted by its legislature
setting the framework for defining a proper
education; and (3) definitions of the words in the
state constitution's clauses set at the time of
ratification. The court stated: "[W]e can define 'a
thorough and efficient system of public schools
Campbell County School District v. State,
adequate to the proper instruction of the state's
907 P.2d 1238, 1258-59 (Wyo. 1995).
youth' as an organization forming a network for
serving the common purpose of public schools
which organization is marked by full detail or
complete in all respects and productive without
waste and is reasonably sufficient for the
appropriate or suitable
teaching/education/learning of the state's school
age children."
Julianna Wade

2008.01.24 - Lobato v. People - 216 P.3d 29-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2008.01.24 - Lobato v. People - 216 P.3d 29-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

User Name: Julianna Wade

Date and Time: Dec 18, 2015

11:55 p.m. EST

Job Number: 27306079

Lobato v. People, 216 P.3d 29

As of: December 18, 2015 11:55 PM EST

Anthony Lobato, as an individual and as parent and

Christine Tiemann, as an individual and as parent and

and 12(b)(5). The City and County of Denver District

Disposition: JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.

HN1 See Colo. Const. art. IX, 15.

HN2 See Colo. Const. art. IX, 2.

Civil Procedure > ... > Jurisdiction > Subject Matter

Plaintiffs, parents and school districts, brought an action

Civil Procedure > ... > Responses > Defenses, Demurrers

HN3 Colo. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) governs motions to dismiss

HN4 On appeal from a dismissal for lack of subject

HN8 A plaintiff has standing if (1) the plaintiff suffered an

Civil Procedure > Appeals > Standards of Review > De

HN5 A Colo. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(5) motion to dismiss tests

Constitutional Law > ... > Case or Controversy >

Civil Procedure > Appeals > Standards of Review > De

HN9 A political subdivision lacks standing to challenge

Civil Procedure > Appeals > Standards of Review >

HN6 Notwithstanding the allegations of a complaint,

HN7 Standing is a limitation on a court's subject matter

Education Law > Administration & Operation > School

HN10 The Local Control Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX,

HN17 Whether a plaintiff has standing is inextricably

HN12 The jurisdictional nature of standing permits a

HN18 Standing is a threshold jurisdictional question

HN13 In the context of standing, to determine whether

HN14 Parents can sue on behalf of their children.

Civil Procedure > ... > Jurisdiction > Subject Matter

HN19 There is a significant difference between

Education Law > Students > Right to Education

HN15 In the context of standing, inadequate access to

HN16 In the context of standing, an interest is legally

HN20 Claims that challenge states' school finance

HN21 There are six independent factors to review in

HN22 The Colorado General Assembly has plenary

HN23 In the context of determining whether a

Governments > Courts > Authority to Adjudicate

HN24 Under Colo. Const. art. VI, 1, the judicial branch

HN25 The Education Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX, 2,

HN26 Interpretation cannot solve the lack of clarity or

HN27 The Education Clause, Colo. Const. art. IX, 2,

HN28 The question of educational quality is inherently

Governments > Courts > Authority to Adjudicate

HN29 A court must not make or weigh policy.

HN30 The best public policy which can be adopted to

HN31 Because the relationship between school funding

HN34 Judicial power is limited to the extent that a court

Opinion by: WEBB

Constitutional Law > The Judiciary > Case or Controversy >

HN32 Deciding whether a matter has been committed

HN33 A justiciable issue requires a present, substantial

[*32] This case questions the adequacy of Colorado's

We conclude that as political subdivisions, the school

expend, monies from the state education fund

may only be used to comply with subsection (1)

the sufficiency of the complaint. Wagner v. Grange Ins.

interpretation of a constitutional provision remains a