Opinion ID: 2615891
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: The State has a mandatory duty to make ample provision for the basic education of resident children through a general and uniform system.

Text: [16] As we indicated in Section IX, the State must make ample provision for the basic education of our resident children through a general and uniform system supported by dependable and regular tax sources. While Const. art. 9, § 1 imposes upon the State the basic duty of making ample provision for the education of all [resident] children, it is not self-executing insofar as legislation is required to give effect to the mandate. However, the fact that the Legislature possesses an ultimate obligation to act is not to say that it may act or not act as it chooses. The duty to act as well as the duty to do so within the parameters of Const. art. 9, §§ 1 and 2 is constitutionally required.
[17] Appellants argue that to impose upon the State a mandatory duty to make ample provision for the education of its resident children through regular and dependable tax sources will open a pandora's box. It is suggested that if the educational system is accorded such preeminence, other state functions will demand similar treatment because they are either mentioned in the constitution or have an important statewide impact. Whether others will seek larger portions of the tax dollar is unpredictable. However, such attempts cannot be made on the same constitutional basis. Only in Const. art. 9, § 1 is it declared a paramount duty of the State to make ample provision for a service mandated by the constitution.