Judge Peter Doyne, the special master appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court to handle ongoing Abbott v. Burke litigation, issued an opinion earlier today finding that students in poor urban schools suffered the greatest impact from school funding cuts to poor urban schools in Chris Christie's first budget. Doyne distills the record, which is thousands of pages long, and his findings of fact on page 93 of the opinon:
1. If the SFRA formula had been fully funded for FY 11 an additional $1.6 billion would have been required;
2. Despite the State's best efforts, the reductions fell more heavily upon our high risk districts and the children educated within those districts;
3. The aid reductions have moved many districts further away from "adequacy"; and
4. The greatest impact of the reductions fell upon our at risk students.
The special master's hearings and opinion constitute the record upon which the Supreme Court will base its decision in this most recent round of the Abbott litigation, and the court is likely to give a great deal of weight to his recommendations. Barring a dramatic shift in the court's approach to school funding cases, the court will probably declare Christie's cuts unconstitutional.
Most Republicans realized that the special master is simply doing his job—namely, answering the questions the Supreme Court asked him by finding facts based on evidence applying the law as set out in statute and caselaw—and therefore directed most of their criticism at the Supreme Court. But one Republican State Senator aimed his infantile rant against the ruling not only at the State Supreme Court, but the special master as well. That Senator is Mike Doherty, and as a lawyer, he should know better. He must understand that the Special Master, like lower court judges, has no authority to overrule the State Supreme Court or ignore its opinions. Yet Doherty would have the Special Master disregard a quarter century of precedent from the same Supreme Court that appointed him.
Doherty may think the Abbott cases are bad precedent. He's entitled to his own opinion, one that the Christie administration surely shares and will probably argue before the State Supreme Court. But he shouldn't attack the special master in the press for doing his job. |
.gif)
