Christie v. Court: Is threat for real?

He has considered ignoring N.J. justices if they order more school funding. Legal scholars said that would be a historic breach.

April 24, 2011|By Matt Katz, Inquirer Trenton Bureau
  • Gov. Christie says he will not raise taxes to restore funding.

Just how powerful is he?

Gov. Christie said last week that he had mulled defying a possible order from New Jersey's Supreme Court to restore funding to schools.

The statement, on a call-in radio show, left legal scholars wondering whether this was the Republican governor just spouting threats and bluster - or foreshadowing an unprecedented break with tradition.

If Christie ignores the ruling, scholars said, he could be ruled in contempt of court and personally fined, he could be impeached for violating his oath of office, or he could trigger a constitutional crisis and the statewide closing of schools.

Or maybe nothing would result, and voters would be left to decide whether to reelect a governor who overruled the highest court in his state in the name of fiscal prudence.

Story continues below.

To the Rutgers University faculty member who founded the group suing for more school funding, such defiance is so unfathomable it calls to mind the Arkansas governor who, 54 years ago, ignored the U.S. Supreme Court order to integrate public schools.

"In our system, one branch doesn't say to another: 'Sorry, you have acted in your authority, but I don't like your actions, so I don't have to follow it,' " said professor Paul Tractenberg. "Christie might not be literally standing in the schoolhouse doors and blocking them, but he's doing something very" similar.

The current case had its origins nearly 40 years ago. The nonprofit Education Law Center sued the state for more money for poor schools, saying equitable funding was a right under the state constitution because of a provision, approved by voters in 1875, mandating a "thorough and efficient" education.

Christie has argued that the resulting court rulings, known as Abbott decisions, have been a failure because poor districts get a disproportionate amount of state funding - and spend far more per student - yet still have abysmal graduation rates and standardized test scores.

In 2010, to close a yawning budget deficit, Christie eliminated $1 billion in school funding. He restored just $250 million in his proposed budget for the fiscal year that will begin in July.

Money, he argues, doesn't ensure students a good education. Instead, Christie has proposed to improve the lot of impoverished students by expanding charter schools, tying teacher tenure to students' academic performance, and rewarding educators in poor schools with higher salaries.

1 | 2 | 3 | Next »
|
|
|
|
|