Text

Section 1. Educational goals and duties. (1) It is the goal of the people to establish a system of education which will develop the full educational potential of each person. Equality of educational opportunity is guaranteed to each person of the state. (2) The state recognizes the distinct and unique cultural heritage of the American Indians and is committed in its educational goals to the preservation of their cultural integrity. (3) The legislature shall provide a basic system of free quality public elementary and secondary schools. The legislature may provide such other educational institutions, public libraries, and educational programs as it deems desirable. It shall fund and distribute in an equitable manner to the school districts the state's share of the cost of the basic elementary and secondary school system. Mont. Const. art. X, § 1.

History

Sources

1884 Constitution

It shall be the duty of the Legislative Assembly of Montana to establish and maintain a general, uniform, and thorough system of public, free, common schools.Proposed 1884 Mont. Const. art. IX, § 1, available at: http://courts.mt.gov/portals/113/library/docs/1884const.pdf

An Address to the Voters of the Territory of Montana

Education: "No State Constitution has made better educational provisions than the one we present for your candid consideration. The experience of mankind has demon started that the happiness, prosperity and permanency of a country is measured by the intelligence of its people. No surer or better means for the dissemination of knowledge among all classes of society has ever been devised than the one here presented. This Constitution commits the State fully and unequivocally to the perpetual maintenance of public free schools; opens the school doors unconditionally to the admission of all between the ages of five and twenty-one years. Three months school is the minimum allowed to any school district in the State. Our magnificent dowry of school lands is most carefully provided for, the grand object being to secure the utmost, both for principal and interest, with a full guarantee by the State against loss or diversion of any part thereof; but that liberal endowment of public lands made to aid our public schools, and to which Montana will fall heir at the death of our present system of Territorial government, is yet under the control of the General Government, and cannot be utilized to our benefit until Montana puts on the habiliments of statehood. It can in no way be used or leased, or even protected for the benefit of our schools. A wise and economic use of the grant will ensure incalculable benefits to the sons and daughters of Montana, and pour a rich endowment into our school fund; but in our present condition the liberal act that provided us such a legacy is practically a dead letter. No stronger guarantees could have been devised than are contained in this Constitution to prevent our schools of every grade from falling into the hands or under the influence of any sect or creed, or political party."Mont. Const. Conv. Occasional Papers, Paper 1

1889 Constitution

It shall be the duty of the legislative assembly of Montana to establish and maintain a general, uniform and thorough system of public, free, common schools. 1889 Mont. Const. art. XI, § 1, available at: http://www.umt.edu/media/law/library/MontanaConstitution/Miscellaneous%20Documents/1889_const.pdf. .

Other Sources

Comparison With Other States

COMMENT: This section is identical to Section 1, Article IX of the 1884 Constitution. Section 1 has never been amended, nor have any amendments been proposed to alter its 1889 wording; and was passed without comment (Proceedings, p. 520)

ALASKA: "The legislature shall by general law establish and maintain a system of public schools open to all children of the State, and may provide for other public educational institutions..." Article VII, Section 1.

Hawaii: "The State shall provide for the establishment, support and control of a statewide system of public schools..." Article IX, Section 1.

Michigan: "The legislature shall maintain and support a system of free public elementary and secondary schools as defined by law..." Article VIII, Section 2.

New Jersey: "The legislature shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of free public schools for the instruction of all children in the State..." Article VIII, Section 4(1).

Puerto Rico: "...There shall be a system of free and wholly non-sectarian public education" Puerto Rico Bill of Rights, Article II, Section 5.

Model State Constitution: "The legislature shall provide for the maintenance and support of a system of free public schools open to all children." Part of Article IX, Section 9.01Mont. Const. Conv. Occasional Papers, 1971-1972, Report No. 5, Comparison of the Montana Constitution with the Constitutions of Selected Other States, at 244, available at: https://archive.org/stream/comparisonofmont00montrich#page/223/mode/2up

Drafting

1972 Constitution

Committee Proposals

On February 22, 1972, the majority of the Education and Public Lands Committee proposed a new Article on Education. What is now Article X, § 1 was proposed as follows: "Section 1. EDUCATIONAL GOALS AND DUTIES OF THE STATE. It shall be the goal of the people of Montana to provide for the establishment of a system of education which will develop the full educational potential of each person. Equality of educational opportunity shall be guaranteed to each person of the State. The legislature shall provide for a system of high quality free public elementary and secondary schools. The legislature may also provide for other educational institutions, public libraries and educational programs as are deemed desirable. It shall be the duty of the legislature to provide by taxation or other means and to distribute in an equitable manner funds sufficient to insure full funding of the public elementary and secondary school system."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. II at 718, available at: http://courts.mt.gov/portals/113/library/mt_cons_convention/vol2.pdf.

Pertinent to Article X, § 1, the Committee's comments on the majority proposal (above) were as follows: "Education occupies a place of cardinal importance in the public realm. The educational system is charged with the task of shaping and cultivating the mind of each succeeding generation and with developing the capacities for cultural and technical advancement of society...Because of this overriding importance of education, the committee recognizes the awesome task of providing the appropriate Constitutional provisions necessary to protect and nurture the public educational system. Each aspect of existing and proposed Constitutional language was thoroughly and deeply reflected upon by the committee in light of present and future needs. Fundamental to the committee's considerations were the twin goals of protecting the integrity of a quality educational system and allowing for flexibility to meet changes as yet unknown but which will certainly occur in future developments in the field of learning. In light of these aims, the committee has preserved those provisions in the existing Constitution which have proven worth and which pose no hinderance to potential developments. On the other hand, the committee has made revision in these places where its aw a definite need for constitutional improvement. Some of these changes have to do with the basic aims of the educational system...The most significant revisions are a clear statement of educational goals of the state, a mandate for the support of education..."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr. vol. II at 721.

The Committee's comments continue: "The proposed section by the committee would replace sections 1, 6 and 7 of the existing Constitution. The committee desires to broaden the goals set forth for an educational system beyond those which might have been appropriate for public schools at the time of writing the existing Constitution. The horizons of education are constantly expanding. There has been a growing recognition of educational rights which extend beyond arbitrary age and school term limitations. Society has accepted the duty to support a quality educational system, and courts have stressed that it must be made available on approximately equal terms. Thus, the committee proposes a new section which takes into account the widened perspectives embodied in these developments."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr. vol. II at 722.

"The first sentence, 'It shall be the goal of the people of Montana to provide for the establishment of a system of education which will develop the full educational potential of each person,' is appropriate as a statement of purpose for education in the state. Learning is gradually being recognized as a process which extends from early months till the late years of life. A long range goal of the state should be to foster and support this learning process for all citizens to the maximum level possible in any given era. The committee realizes that economic and human resources may be insufficient at present to promote learning 'to the full educational potential of each person,' but it feels strongly that the gaol should be set forth as an ideal to serve as a guide for educational development in the state. All members of society should be ultimately eligible for the benefits of enlightenment and skills acquired through the educational process."Id.

The Committee's comments then turn to "equal educational opportunity," and shed light on the financing underpinnings of this provision: "The subject of 'equal educational opportunity has become a particularly important doctrine in modern education. Recent federal, district and state court decisions have interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution as applying to educational financing. Under this doctrine, the state must show a compelling interest to maintain a classification system by wealth which interferes with the individual's fundamental right to an education. By this standard the courts have ruled that the school district financing systems in four states violate equal protection. Montana's school financing system is similar to those declared unconstitutional in the states where challenges have been made.1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. II at 722-23

Delegate Proposals

Delegate Proposal No. 11 (Blend): Delegate Virginia H. Blend proposed a "new constitutional section providing for full state funding of all free public schools." Specifically, Delegate Proposal No. 11 proposed the following language be included in the new Constitution: "All funds, both operational and capital, to support the free public schools shall be appropriated by the Legislature. No real or personal property taxes may be used to support free public schools."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. I at 95 (Jan. 21, 1972)

Delegate Proposal No. 43 (Champoux, Campbell, Cate, and Scanlin): The Delegates offered a new Constitutional section providing for equality of educational opportunity. Specifically, the proposal called for a provision in the Constitution as follows: "Equality of educational opportunity shall be guaranteed to each person of the state. The legislature shall provide for the establishment of programs necessary to develop the full educational potential of each person."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. I at 139 (Jan. 27, 1972).

Delegate Proposal No. 46 (McKeon): Proposal 46 dealt with public school financing. Specifically, the proposal called for a new Constitutional provision providing, "Public School Financing. The state shall assume all financial responsibility for public free schools."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. I at 143.

Delegate Proposal No. 68 (Davis): This proposal was titled as "A Proposal to Amend Article XI, Sections 1, 3, 5, and 12 and to repeal sections 6, 7 and 10 of that Article to provide for investment of public school funds as provided by law." The proposal read: "Article XI, Section 1 of the present Constitution is amended to read as follows: 'Sec. 1. The legislative assembly of Montana shall establish and maintain a general, uniform, thorough and equitable system of public, free, common schools open to all persons as provided by law.'"1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. I at 169 (Jan. 29, 1972)

Delegate Proposal No. 91 (Blaylock, Harbaugh, James, Davis, Brown, Harper, Harlow, Conover, Reichert, Johnson, Barnard, Burkhardt): This proposal was another attempt at revising what is now Article X, § 1. The proposal read: "The legislature shall establish a program of state taxation and a method of distributing funds for the support of free public schools to assure equal quality educational opportunity for all students."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. I at 204 (Feb. 2, 1972)

Delegate Proposal No. 143 (Toole): This proposal was titled "A Proposal for a Neo Constitutional Section Combining Sections 1 and 6 of Article XI of the Present Constitution." It read with respect to what is now Article X, § 1: "It shall be the duty of the legislative assembly of Montana to establish and maintain a general, uniform, and thorough system of free public education open to all persons of such ages and qualifications as may be established by law."1972 Mont. Const. Conv. Tr., vol. I at 284 (Feb. 4, 1972)

Ratification

The 1972 Constitutional Convention Delegates ratified Article X, § 1 in its present form.See http://www.umt.edu/media/law/library/MontanaConstitution/Miscellaneous%20Documents/72%20Const%20ratif.pdf

1972 Voter's Pamphlet

The 1972 Voter's Pamphlet noted Article X, § 1 in two different places. First, under the "Highlights" section, the Voter's Pamphlet included the following: "The 'distinct and unique cultural heritage' of American Indians receives constitutional recognition; one of the state's educational goals is stated to be the preservation of Indians' cultural integrity." Proposed 1972 Constitution for the State of Montana Official Text With Explanation (1972 Constitution Voter's Information Pamphlet), Page 4, available at http://www.umt.edu/law/library/files/1972voterspamphlet. Second, in the section of the Voter's Pamphlet dedicated to the Proposed Constitution itself with commentary, the following language appeared under Article X, § 1: "Revises 1889 Constitution. Expresses the goal of the State to educate all of its citizens regardless of their ages. Creates a right to equal educational opportunity and specifically recognizes unique heritage of Indians." Id. at Page 15.

Documentary History of Ratification of the 1972 Constitution

Brown Collection

available at: http://www.umt.edu/law/library/montanaconstitution/brown.php The collection includes an article from the Independent Record titled Indian Ask for Changes in State School Practices, authored by Dennis E. Curran. The article shed's light on a possible motivation behind Article X, § 1, specifically the last sentence of subsection (1) and all of subsection (2). The article reads, "Montana's first residents, the Indians, came before a Constitutional Convention committee Thursday to urger constitutional language which would help bring better education for their people. Indian representatives testified before the Education Committee in favor of provisions for equal educational opportunity, preservation of Indian cultural integrity and greater Indian involvement in education. Earl Barlow, Indian education supervisor in the state office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, told delegates that Indians encounter many problems in society and need special mention in an equal opportunity provision. A broad provision could be ineffective, he said...Francis Satterthwalte, a lobbyist for the Montana Inter-Tribal Policy Board and a member of the National Indian Health Advisory Board, complained that Americans don't understand Indian culture--and for years were intent on 'making Indians non Indians.' 'Somewhere in the constitution there should be something that would preserve the cultural integrity of our Indian people.' she said." Dennis E. Curran, Indian Ask for Changes In State School Practices, The Independent Record, Friday (February 4, 1972)

The Brown Collection also includes an article from the Billings Gazette that touches briefly on Article X, § 1. The article's main focus was the early proposals included in the Education Committee's draft, but had the following to say specifically regarding Article X, § 1: "Other committee conclusions are...a guarantee of equal educational opportunity and a flexible stance on the method of school financing...Other provisions in the tentative draft: --GUARANTEES OF equal educational opportunity and a chance for each person to develop his full educational potential."Two-board plan backed, Gazette State Bureau (February 10, 1972).

Another article in the Brown collection helps uncover the motivation behind Article X, § 1(2) regarding American Indians. The Great Falls Tribune article from February 1972, which primarily addresses two boards of education, reads in pertinent part as follows: "Several Indians and a lobbyist for the Inter-Tribal Policy Board wanted some mention of Indians in the opening section that guarantees equality of educational opportunity. Earl Barlow, Helena, who supervises Indian education in the superintendent of public instruction's office, said statements attributed to delegate R.S. Hanson, I-Ronan, showed the need to mention Indians in the constitution. Hanson was quoted as Thursday as saying Indians were poor risks and renters. Barlow said education was the vehicle for Indians to escape 'this morass the dominant culture has imposed upon us.'"Charles S. Johnson, Two Prexies Endorse Suggestion for 2 Education Boards, Great Falls Tribune, February 12, 1972.

Yet another article in the Brown Collection touches on the inclusion of Article X, § 1(2) and the guarantee of educational opportunity contained in § 1(1) to the 1972 Constitution. Indeed, the article, titled Indians Plea for Preservation of Heritage, reads, in pertinent part: "Several Indian spokesmen asked a Constitution Convention committee Wednesday to include provisions committing Montana to preserve their cultural integrity and to guarantee them equal educational opportunity. Making the request to members of the Bill of Rights Committee was Carson Boyd, Brockton, who represented the Montana Inter-Tribal Policy Board...Boyd, who represents the state's seven Indian reservations and its [ ] Indians, offered two proposals. He asked that this statement be incorporated in the new bill of rights: 'The state of Montana recognizes the distinct and unique cultural heritage and identity of the American Indians, and the state of Montana shall be forever committed to the preservation of the cultural integrity of the American Indians.' The rich Indian heritage was in jeopardy, he said. 'I feel like our heritage is part of the country like the trees and the grass'...young Indians were not as interested in preserving the heritage through dancing as the older ones were. He also requested that this policy statement be part of the new constitution: 'American Indians in the state of Montana shall forever enjoy the right of equal educational opportunity in all public institutions.' Asked by the committee to describe the discrimination, Boyd said some Indian children feel inferior and fall behind because their clothes are not as good as those worn by others...'We have to break the cycle somewhere,' he said...Supporting Boyd were Earl Barlow, state supervisor of Indian education, and Bill Danning of the Rocky Boy Reservation...Barlow said...the equal educational opportunity section 'would give us something to hang our hat on.' Delegate Bob Campbell, D-Missoula, said he favored including both provisions, perhaps in the ordinance in the constitution."Charles Johnson, Indians Plea for Preservation of Heritage (date unknown)

Again, the Brown collection contains an article addressing Article X, § 1(2). This article, titled Amendments at Con Con Recognize Indian Heritage, highlights several delegates' proposal to recognize Montana's Indian heritage. In pertinent part, the article reads: "Several Constitutional Convention delegates plan to amend the education article to recognize Montana's Indian heritage. Though a separate Indian bill of rights had been mentioned for the Bill of Rights Article, most of the testimony from citizens on this issue concerned education [indiscernible language]...Blaylock said that the thrust of the amendment, which will be proposed by a vice president, Dorothy Eck, D-Bozeman, would be to make persons aware of Montana's Indian heritage. In areas with large Indian populations, [Blaylock] said, school officials might then add courses committed to the preservation of Indian culture. Such curriculum, he said, might also include the vital contribution that Indians can make, and have made, to society. Blaylock said the proposal would probably be tacked to one of the sections in the proposed new education article, instead of an entirely new section...[a] dozen witnesses had appeared before the Education Committee to testify in favor of Indian education provisions in the constitution. Ten witnesses appeared before the bill of rights committee to testify on the need for Indian education or Indian rights provisions."Amendments at Con Con Recognize Indian Heritage, Tribute Capital Bureau (date unavailable)

Another article regarding Article X, § 1(2) is contained in the Brown collection. This article, titled Indian Culture Receives Con Con Assurances, documents the delegates' recent approval "committing the state to preserve the cultural integrity of its first residents, the American Indians, in its educational goals." The article goes on: "Groups representing some of the state's 35,000 reservation and landless Indians had asked various committees for some consideration without much success until the action Friday, which passed 83-1. The section, offered as an amendment to part of the education article, says [current language of Article X, § 1(2)]. It was submitted by Dorothy Eck, D-Bozeman, and amended to include educational goals by Gene Harbaugh, D-Poplar. 'What we have been doing is pushing them back and forth between these committees in an attempt to get rid of them and they know it, said Chairman Richard J. Champoux, D-Kalispell, of the Education Committee. 'The first day I came to this assembly, I looked around and wondered why there were no Indians here as delegates...Later, as I left the chamber I saw four Indians standing outside the door and I thought how ironic. There they are--typically standing outside the door while the white man makes all the decisions for them inside.' Champoux said it was impossible not to consider Montana Indians as a special group. Other delegates echoed their support. The only delegate to speak against the motion on the floor was Archie O. Wilson, R-Hysham. 'I have lived with Indians all my life...[t]hey have been exploited but have been provided with equal educational opportunity for years...[t]hese people want equal educational opportunity and to be recognized as equals and not be set aside as being different...Indians must learn the white man's ways...If they pursue equal educational facilities, they certainly are just as free to be a constitutional convention delegate, a governor, a senator or a representative or hold any office.' Wilson later clarified his remarks and said he wanted to keep the education system as it is and not have separate schools for whites and Indians. Although he spoke against the amendment, Wilson voted for it. The lone opponent was Lloyd Barnard, D-Saco, who did not speak on the proposal. After the vote, Earl J. Barlow, Indian education superintendent of public instruction, praised the delegates...'this is the dawn of a new era of understanding of our people and our culture which is vital to our existence."Charles Johnson, Indian Culture Receives Con Con Assurances (date unavailable)

The Brown collection also contains a newspaper article concerning the language contained in Article X, § 1(1). The article, titled School Board Association Continues Debate on Con Con Education Plans, reads in pertinent part: "The Montana School Boards Association has delivered another attack on the proposals of the Constitutional Convention's Education Committee, which are scheduled for debate later this week. The association begins its latest letter to delegates with a jab at what it terms 'ambiguous' language. For example, what is the 'full educational potential of each person' asks MSBA lobbyist James Kenny. 'The ambiguity can be realized when we admit there are few people anywhere that have developed their full educational potential...[t]he goal of the people should be equality of educational opportunity as stated in the second sentence of proposed Section 1. Legislative interpretation of the word 'full' may lead to an over-extended educational emphasis that would be completely beyond the ability of the people of Montana to finance.'"School Board Association Continues Debate on Con Con Education Plans, Tribune Capitol Bureau (date not provided)

Another article in the Brown collection addresses the Education Committee's proposals regarding what are now subsection 1(1) and 1(3) of Article X, § 1. Specifically, the article, the main focus of which was the structure of the board(s) of education, had the following to say: "Beyond the question of structure, the committee also offers some other new constitutional approaches to education: -Educational goals. The state goal would be to develop the 'full educational potential of each person,' and each person would be guaranteed 'equality of educational opportunity. -Financing...Besides providing for equal educational opportunity, the proposal calls for 'high quality free public elementary and secondary schools' and directs the legislature to insure 'full funding' of the public schools and make sure the funding is equitable. The legislature would be encouraged to provide funds for public libraries and other educational programs."Dennis Curran, Education super board proposed, Standard State Bureau (date unavailable)

The final article in the Brown collection addressing Article X, § 1 concerns both subsections 1(1) and 1(3). Specifically, the article sheds light on possibly why the last sentence in 1(3) addressing the legislature's obligation to fund the public education system only obligates the State to pay "its share of the cost" as opposed to fully funding the public education system. In pertinent part, the article reads as follows: "Delegates overturned a Constitutional Convention committee recommendation Friday and deleted part of a section directing the legislature to provide full funding of the state's elementary and secondary school systems. They spent much of the afternoon on this section, which sets forth educational goals and the duties of the state. Russell C. McDonough, D-Glendive, said the section went into unnecessary legislative details that ought to be avoided in a constitution. He said the legislature has the power to fully fund the school systems, and the constitutional mandate was not needed. Richard J. Champoux, D-Kalispell, said the Education Committee had included the provision because the legislature was not fully funding the School Foundation Program. Arnold W. Jacobsen, R-Whitefish, said delegates were putting another burden on the legislators...The sentence that was deleted said: 'It shall be the duty of the legislature to provide by taxation or other means and distribute in an equitable manner to the several school districts of the state funds sufficient to insure full funding of the basic public elementary and secondary school system.' Committee members faithfully argued that the sentence was needed to insure support of the public school system. William H. Artz, D-Great Falls, moved to delete the sentence, and his motion passed 50-38." With respect other provisions within Article X, § 1, the article notes, "[t]hey also approved a section saying that a goal of the state's residents was to set up an educational system 'that will develop the full educational potential of each person.' Part of the section also says that all Montanans shall be guaranteed equality of educational opportunity."School Funding Mandate Deleted, Associated Press (date unavailable)

Neely Collection

available at: http://www.umt.edu/law/library/montanaconstitution/neely.php Gerald Neely compiled newspaper articles concerning the 1972 Constitution from smaller newspapers that are not contained in the "MT Newspapers Mansfield" Collection. One article is a Letter to the Editor in the Westmont Wife that, in part, addresses Article X, § 1. The author (Mrs. Marcella Warlla of Butte) offered the following statements: "The unqualified endorsement being given to the proposed Montana Constitution by the Montana Catholic Conference causes one to wonder if they are ready and anxious to dispose of the moral doctrine that parents are responsible for the education and welfare of their children. [Article X, § 1 reprinted]. Should the proposed Constitution be adopted, the state will decide the extent of a child's potential--which child will dig ditches and which will go to college. Parents will no longer have the God-given, moral responsibility for their children. As it was in Nazi Germany, as it is in Russia and China, the 'State' will provide for each and for all. No Christian should vote away ANY God-given right! From the Preamble to the Adoption Schedule, the proposed Constitution successfully limits and abolishes the rights of the people by making their sovereignty and freedom subject to the whims of the legislature. It advocates totalitarian socialism. [Speaking to Article IX, § 1 as an example of "totalitarian socialism"]...That socialism or totalitarianism will help the poor is an age-old deception. The proposed Constitution provides for a totalitarian socialistic government for the State of Montana. How many people really want that?"Westmont Wire, Letter to Editor, available at: http://www.umt.edu/media/law/library/MontanaConstitution/Neely%20Collection/Newspaper%20Articles%20smaller%20papers.pdf (date indiscernible)

Campbell Collection

available at: http://www.umt.edu/law/library/montanaconstitution/campbell.php Delegate Campbell's collection includes a summary of the Proposed 1972 Constitution drafted by Professor Richard Roeder. Roeder's summary--which was inserted into many Montana newspapers prior to the public vote--had the following to say regarding Article X, § 1: "Section 1 recognizes, for the first time in our fundamental law, the special position of the American Indian and his contribution to our cultural heritage. It recognizes equality of educational opportunity as a basic right and at the same time emphasizes that such opportunities shall be of a high quality. It commits the state to the responsibility of achieving these two goals of quality and equality."Richard Roeder, 1972 Constitution Newspaper Supplement, 5, available at http://www.umt.edu/media/law/library%5CMontanaConstitution%5CCampbell/1972MTConstNewspaperSupp.pdf

The Campbell collection also includes an article authored by Gerald Neely titled A Critical Look; Montana's New Constitution.available at: http://www.umt.edu/media/law/library%5CMontanaConstitution%5CCampbell/NeelyPamphlet.pdf. Neely's article includes the following language regarding Article X, § 1: "Revisions were made in the basic aims of the educational system...Broad goals of an educational system which will develop the full 'educational potential' and guarantee 'equality of educational opportunity' are states as express purposes. (Art. X, sec. 1(1)). Recognition is given to the 'distinct and unique cultural heritage' of Indians and the commitment in educational to preservation of their 'cultural integrity.' (Art. X, sec. 1(2)). A basic system of 'free quality public elementary and secondary' schools is required, other institutions being left to the legislature's discretion. (Art. X, sec. 1(3)), the state's share of the cost to be distributed in an 'equitable' manner."Gerald Neely, A Critical Look: Montana's New Constitution, 26 (1972).

Interpretation

1972 Constitution

Helena Elementary School District No. 1 v. State

Helena Elementary School Dist. No. 1 v. State, the Court considered the constitutionality of the method of public school funding. The Court held that § 1(1), specifically the sentence providing, "[e]quality of educational opportunity is guaranteed to each person of the state," is not merely an aspirational goal, but rather a cosntitutional guarantee."236 Mont. 44, 52-53. This provision applies equally to each individual in Montana, and is applicable to "all branches of government whether at the state, local, or school district level." Id. at 53. Furthermore, the Court held that nothing contained in § 1(3) limits the constitutional guarantee to equality of educational opportunity. Id. With respect to § 1(2)'s textual commitment to the preservation of American Indians' cultural integrity, the Court held §1(2)'s language establishes a special burden on Montana with respect to the education of American Indian children and such burden must be addressed in the funding of public schools. Id. at 58.

Commentary

Notes