Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd on Thursday denied a request from the state to dismiss a 2025 lawsuit filed by Kentucky students, including the Kentucky Student Voice Team, who claim they are not receiving a quality education.
The lawsuit, filed in Franklin Circuit Court, argues that Kentucky has failed to meet its constitutional duty to provide all students with an adequate and equitable public education.
The state is represented by Attorney General Russell Coleman. Defendants in the case include House Speaker David W. Osborne, Senate President Robert Stivers, Education Commissioner Robbie Fletcher, and the Kentucky Board of Education.
State leaders asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that the students lack standing to bring the case and that the legislative defendants are protected by legislative immunity, according to the ruling.
The lawsuit is rooted in the 1989 Rose decision, which led to the Kentucky Education Reform Act of 1990. That landmark effort helped move Kentucky’s schools from the bottom of national rankings to models of improvement.
The students say they are seeking a return to the promises outlined in the Rose decision and the state constitution. Their demands include improvements to classroom instruction, greater attention to students’ physical and emotional health, and higher pay for teachers.
In his ruling, Shepherd noted that the Rose decision established that students and others with a direct stake in the outcome of a constitutional challenge to Kentucky’s public school system have the right to sue under the state constitution.
The judge also cited Rose in reaffirming that the legislature holds the sole responsibility for providing an efficient system of common schools.
While another court case has recognized broad legislative immunity under the Kentucky Constitution, Shepherd said that protection is not absolute. As a result, the students’ lawsuit is allowed to move forward.
“The issues raised in these motions are important,” Shepherd wrote. “While the Court has denied the Defendants’ motions, it is mindful that this is the beginning and not the end of the constitutional issues that must be dealt with in this case.”
The ruling added that questions surrounding the scope of the legislature’s constitutional duty remain central to the case.
“The issues before the Court are standing and legislative immunity, and on those issues, the Court is compelled to reject the arguments advanced by Defendants,” the ruling said.
It remains unclear when the next court hearing in the case will be scheduled.
Leave a Comment