OKLAHOMA

Constitutional Clauses/Language

“Provisions shall be made for the establishment and maintenance of a system of public schools, which shall be open to all the children of the state and free from sectarian control; and said schools shall always be conducted in English: Provided, that nothing herein shall preclude the teaching of other languages in said public schools.”

Okla. Const. art. 1, s. 5.

“The Legislature shall establish and maintain a system of free public schools wherein all the children of the State may be educated.”

Okla. Const. art. 13, s.1.

Major Court Decision: Fair School Finance Council of Oklahoma, Inc. v. State, 746 P.2d 1135 (Okla. 1987).

Result: Financing System Upheld

Summary: The court labeled education a “fundamental interest,” but held that the state’s due process clause does not require equality in the educational system of Oklahoma.  The state’s only obligation is to provide for an adequate education for all students.  The court also reasoned that separation of powers concerns limited the court’s authority to simply deciding if the legislature had acted in accordance with its powers; the court found that the legislature had done so.

Key Quotes:

“The fact that there may be flaws in the administration of the ad valorem tax does not support a claim that the entire school finance system is unconstitutional simply because some of its revenues are derived from those taxes.”  Id. at 1143.

 “Thus, under the Oklahoma Constitution, fundamental rights are not necessarily determined by whether they are provided for within the document. We accordingly reject the Rodriguez test as inappropriate... Nor is equal educational opportunity-in the sense of equal expenditures per pupil-guaranteed by the express terms of our state constitution. Article 1 § 5 states that ‘provisions shall be made for the establishment and maintenance of a system of public schools, which shall be open to all children of the state....’ Article 13 § 1 provides that ‘the Legislature shall establish and maintain a system of free public schools wherein all children of the State may be educated.’ These sections merely mandate actions by the Legislature to establish and maintain a system of free public schools. They do not on their face guarantee equal expenditures per pupil.”

“Assuming that education is a fundamental interest, the question remains as to what is the exact nature of the interest guaranteed. In Miller v. Childers this court discussed the Legislature's obligations under Article 13 § 1 of the Constitution. We held that the school system should provide our youth with ‘such degree of learning that when the work is done they may be educated young men and women’ and with ‘such mental and moral training as will make them useful citizens of our great commonwealth.’ Again, in School Dist. No. 25 of Woods County v. Hodge, this court held that State Aid was ‘intended to aid in assuring a minimum educational program for all children of the state.’  We also stated that the program was designed ‘to insure uniformity of opportunity to all children of the state to receive at least the degree of instruction embraced by the minimum program.’ Thus, the right guaranteed in Article 13 § 1 is a basic, adequate education according to the standards that may be established by the State Board of Education. There is nothing in our previous decisions which suggests that the Legislature must provide equal expenditures per pupil in order to accomplish this objective.”  Id. at 1149.

“We find no authority to support the plaintiffs' contention that the school finance system should be subjected to strict judicial scrutiny. We previously have held that our constitution places few restrictions on the Legislature's power to provide a school system for the state and the methods employed by the Legislature in doing so are largely within its discretion. When these methods are challenged, the only justiciable question is whether the Legislature acted within its powers. Where the constitutionality of an act of the Legislature is in question, all reasonable doubt will be resolved in favor of its validity and the act will be declared constitutional unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the Legislature acted arbitrarily and capriciously.”  Id. at 1150.