Boise,ID—The ACLU of Idaho recently filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the Fourth Judicial District Court of the State of Idaho in the matters of Joki v. State 0f Idaho. The Joki case challenges the state’s method of funding schools as being unconstitutional.Plaintiffs claim that school funding, heavily reliant on local property taxes, are unsustainable, inequitable and have forced local school districts to begin charging fees to students. The State has an obligation to provide a “general, uniform and thorough system of free commons schools.”
We agree with the plaintiffs’ claims, and enter this case to specifically address the constitutional question of jurisdiction.
"This case raises existential questions about the purpose of the Idaho judiciary, and whether the provisions and guarantees set forth in our state Constitution have any meanings for the lives of Idahoans, or whether they are instead just unenforceable, aspirational words," said Richard Eppink, ACLU of Idaho Legal Director. “The proper resolution of this case is, therefore, a matter of significant concern to the ACLU and its members throughout Idaho.”
In their brief, the State argues that the courts do not have jurisdiction to rule on the constitutionality of Idaho’s school funding system and that the Legislature has that authority. However, the Constitutionally Based Educational Claims Act (CBECA) does not, nor could any statue ever, deprive the court of jurisdiction the ability to declare a law unconstitutional.
To the extent that CBECA tries to limit the jurisdiction of the court, the Act is invalid. In the Joki case, the plaintiff’s Second Cause of Action challenges whether the Legislature can execute its constitutional obligation to maintain a uniform, thorough, and free public education system by simple “hereby declar[ing]” it so. The Legislature must yield to the courts to determine whether the state is adequately meeting its constitutional obligation ###