Unified School District No. 229 v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting Blue Valley plaintiffs’ claim that the SDFQPA violated the right of equal protection contained in Section 1 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights
• interpreting Category I clause; explaining that a court can use \the standards enunciated by the legislature and the state department of education\
• interpreting Category I clause; explaining that a court can use “the standards enunciated by the legislature and the state department of education”
• concluding SDFQPA is constitutionally permissible legislation
• issue is whether SDFQPA satisfies the constitution by providing suitable financing, not whether level of finance is optimal or the best policy
• “ ‘[T]he issue of suitability is not stagnant; past history teaches that this issue must be closely monitored/ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).