Back in January, a group of Kentucky students marked a momentous, inspiring moment in front of the Franklin County courthouse when they announced litigation to reopen Kentucky’s landmark school funding case.
On Tuesday, they got a crash course in the gritty, dull realities of the law: A nearly two-hour hearing on whether they even have standing to sue.
Most of the same members of the Kentucky Student Voice Team gathered at the Kentucky Court of Appeals building, thanks to last month’s flooding that has still closed the Franklin County courthouse. Chief Circuit Court Judge Phillip Shepherd heard lawyers for both the General Assembly and the Commonwealth of Kentucky, who argued that the case should be dismissed.
It’s the first step in what’s sure to be a very long process.
The Rose v. Council for Better Education case from 1989 basically found that Kentucky’s public schools were not providing the constitutionally protected right to an efficient education.
As Shepherd noted in arguments on Tuesday, the state was very lucky the governor and the legislature took the findings very seriously, raising taxes to pay for a comprehensive education reform.
The Kentucky Student Voice Team’s case in reopening Rose says that the funding disparities that Rose fixed are once again a problem, and that lack of funding means they are not receiving the kind of education that Rose and the Kentucky Education Reform Act defined.
The government’s lawyers argued the legislature has immunity in this case, but also said they would challenge the standing of the Kentucky Student Voice Team as a plaintiff because the lawsuit did not show enough individual harm to students.
The Rose case was brought by school boards, which themselves were hurt by a lack of funding, argued Aaron Silletto, an attorney with the Kentucky Attorney General’s office. But this new filing only speaks of some students not getting the education they thought they should get.
“But that in and of itself doesn’t create standing,” Silletto said. “They have to show discrete, concrete, particular and actual injury to themselves.”
But attorney Michael Abate, who is representing the Student Voice Team, said the students have standing because they are most affected by the government failing to uphold the Rose decision.
“The loss of a constitutional right is the injury,” he said.
Shepherd asked both sides to consider a previous school funding case from 2007 before he rules on whether the case should be dismissed. So students won’t know anything more for at least another month.
But they got a good dose of civics education outside of class.
“It was really interesting,” said voice team member Ivy Litton, who is graduating from Bath County High School this spring. “It will definitely be a long process, but it’s so exciting to see it progress and it was so invigorating to all of us here.”
Luisa Sanchez is one of the named plaintiffs in the case, hailing from Boyle County.
“I heard diverse perspectives, but I still feel like our voices should be heard, and we’re not getting the education we deserve,” she said.
“This could take years, but I’m here for the long run.”
--30--
Written by Linda Blackford. Cross-posted from the Herald-Leader.
