The North Carolina Supreme Court has overturned precedent this week, reversing a 2022 decision by a bench of justices — then with a Democratic majority — that had ordered the North Carolina General Assembly to transfer $1.75 billion to improve public education statewide.
The court ruled Thursday to reverse the prior court’s decision. The vote was mostly split along party lines.
Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican, wrote the majority opinion. Justice Richard Dietz, a Republican, wrote his own dissent, while Democratic justices Allison Riggs and Anita Earls joined each other on a pair of dissents.
At the heart of this case are two questions:
- Whether the state of North Carolina has failed to meet its constitutional duty to provide children with a "sound, basic education."
- Whether the North Carolina Supreme Court can order state lawmakers to spend funds, despite a separation of powers, if the Court finds the state has been continually in violation of its constitution.
Newby wrote in his opinion that every decision and step taken post-2017 was a significant departure from the lawsuit’s original thrust.
“What began as modest, as-applied challenges to the allocation of educational resources in the named school districts became a full-scale, facial assault on the entire educational system enacted by the General Assembly. When this case ceased to be about the as-applied claims raised in the complaints and refined by this Court’s decisions, the trial court’s authority to hear the case likewise ceased,” Newby wrote.
In response to the Court's decision, Demi Dowdy, a spokeswoman for Speaker of the House Destin Hall, R-Caldwell, wrote in a statement, “Today’s decision rightly recognizes the constitutional role of the North Carolina General Assembly, since the state Constitution entrusts sole appropriations authority to the legislature.”
Dowdy reiterated the House’s commitment to its budget plan that would raise starting teacher pay to $50,000 and give teachers an average raise of 8.7%.
Gov. Josh Stein, a Democrat, wrote in a statement that while he is disappointed in the ruling he will continue to advocate for teacher pay raises, additional support staff and free school breakfast for all students.
"Education opens doors of opportunity for children, but today the Court slammed them in the face of students who deserve the right to a sound basic public education. The Supreme Court simply ignored its own established precedent, enabling the General Assembly to continue to deprive another generation of North Carolina students of the education promised by our Constitution," Stein wrote.
What did the NC Supreme Court rule the last time Leandro was heard?
In 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled 4-to-3 to fund a plan to improve public schools statewide. The "comprehensive remedial plan" was negotiated between then-Attorney General Josh Stein's office, the State Board of Education, and plaintiffs for low-wealth school districts, and was written by the consulting firm WestEd.
The plan has wide-ranging remedies for improving the recruitment of teachers and principals, raising educator compensation, and increasing state funding for public schools and early childhood education.
The full cost of the eight-year plan cannot be determined because it includes policy prescriptions and funding mandates in later years of the plan that depend on studies assigned in earlier years. However, it's clear that it would require billions in state funds. Last year, Rep. Julie von Haefen, D-Wake, filed a bill to fund the sixth and seventh year of the plan, to the tune of $9.6 billion.
In 2022, the state Supreme Court ordered the North Carolina General Assembly to transfer $1.75 billion to fund the 2nd and 3rd years of the plan.
This represents N.C. Supreme Court's fifth ruling on Leandro
The Leandro case began back in 1994. Students from 5 school districts in some of North Carolina's poorest counties sued the state, charging that North Carolina was not meeting its promise in the state constitution to provide every child with an adequate public education.
The North Carolina Supreme Court has heard the case five times in its history:
Newby acknowledged the case’s complex history in his opinion, writing, “To comprehensively explain every twist and turn of this case’s background and procedural history would require gallons of ink spilled across many pages.”
In 1997, the Supreme Court declared North Carolina was obligated to provide all students with a “sound, basic education.”
In 2004, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court's decision that ordered the state to provide, "a competent, certified, well-trained teacher" in every classroom; "a well-trained, competent principal" in every school; and the necessary resources to support instruction. The court decides to defer to the executive and legislative branches to resolve the state's shortcomings.
In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled on a question of whether a state legislated pre-kindergarten program met a lower court's ruling about providing access to services for at-risk children.
In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that the state had continually failed to meet its duty, and upheld a judge's decision to order the North Carolina General Assembly to begin to fund the remedial plan agreed on by the Attorney General's office, the State Board of Education, and plaintiffs for low-wealth school districts. At this stage, attorneys for the General Assembly had entered as a party to the case, to argue that only state lawmakers have the constitutional power to direct the spending of state funds.
In 2024, after an election shifted the majority power on the state Supreme Court from Democrats to Republicans, the Court reheard the Leandro case. Today's decision is the conclusion of that hearing.
Now in 2026, the Supreme Court has ruled that it lacks the power to direct state education spending.
“In short, the judicial branch is not the venue in which to seek education policy reform,” Newby wrote.
Reactions
Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, said in a statement that the ruling properly holds that funding decisions in North Carolina should be made by the legislature.
"For decades, liberal education special interests have improperly tried to hijack North Carolina's constitutional funding process in order to impose their policy preferences via judicial fiat," Berger wrote.
Berger added that Senate Republicans intend to focus on "increasing parental involvement and educational opportunities for students" during the short session.
House Minority Leader Robert Reives, D-Chatham, pointed to Dietz’s decision in his comments about the case.
"For three decades Republican and Democratic judges have recognized and attempted to enforce the right to a sound basic education for everyone. Today four Republican justices nullified that constitutional right overruling a bipartisan minority on the court. The children of our state deserve better,” Reives wrote in a statement.
Anderson Clayton, the chairwoman of the North Carolina Democratic Party, blasted the four Republican judges’ majority opinion.
“Today our State Supreme Court betrayed North Carolina’s children by deciding that zip codes should determine the quality of their schooling and their potential for success. For 30 years, Republican leaders have dragged their feet and robbed a generation of students of their constitutional right to a fair and equitable basic education in our state,” Clayton wrote.
