The Sunflower County Consolidated School District, along with 20 other districts seeking millions from the state in damages related to the Mississippi Adequate Education Program received bad news once again from the state’s court.
This time, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed a previous ruling by the chancery court to dismiss the suit, which had legal backing from a number of attorneys, including former governor Ronnie Musgrove.
“Because Section 37-151-6 does not obligate the Governor to sign a bill fully funding MAEP, the statute cannot be construed as mandatory,” the state’s high court said in its conclusion. “Additionally, because the Governor is not obligated to sign any bill fully funding MAEP, the Districts have not shown any injury, as they cannot show that, even had the Legislature passed a bill fully funding MAEP, that bill would have become law. For these reasons, we affirm the judgment of the chancery court granting the State’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and denying the Districts’ motion for summary judgment.”
Tension has been high over the past few years between local school districts and the state legislature, a body the districts claim has failed to live up to its previous mandate to “fully fund” education for the state.
“Mississippi’s Constitution is clear - it is the Legislature’s sole authority to allocate tax dollars, and I appreciate the decision of the justices to dismiss the lawsuit by a former Democrat elected official,” Lt. Gov. Reeves said in a statement. “I’m proud Mississippi’s Republican leaders have prioritized education at all levels and spent about $400 million more than it did just six years ago, and we will continue to find more ways to invest in the classroom to provide opportunities for our kids.”
Sunflower County Consolidated School District joined the other districts in the suit which sought $235,979,247.49 from the state, a figure derived from the supposed gap in funding from 2010-15.
The Supreme Court affirmed that the MAEP statue is not binding and among other issues surrounding the directive, it cannot overrule future legislative acts.
