whether legislation is appropriate is legislative function); City of
Louisville v. Board of Education, 302 Ky. 647, 195 S.W.2d 291, 293
(1946) (General Assembly has authority "to deal with the common
schools in any way it should desire"); Commonwealth v. Griffen, 268
Ky. 830, 105 S.W.2d 1063, 1065 (1937) (lawmakers have "wide
latitude." "What that system is is ... left wholly to the discretion of the
Legislature."); Madison County Board of Education v. Smith, 250 Ky.
495, 63 S.W.2d 620, 621 (1933) ( "legislative discretion the best
method of providing for an efficient system of common schools.");
Elliott v. Garner, 140 Ky. 157, 130 S.W. 997, 998 (1910) (how
General Assembly shall best accomplish efficient system of common
schools "is purely a matter of legislative discretion").]
It is textbook law that enactments of the General Assembly have a strong
presumption of constitutionality. Jefferson County Police Merit Board v. Bilyeu, Ky.,
634 S.W.2d 414 (1982). It is also a textbook law that where legislative discretion is
present, the judiciary will be reluctant to interfere. See, e.g., American Insurance
Association v. Geary, Ky., 635 S.W.2d 306 (1982). The separation of powers
doctrine of the Kentucky Constitution underpins and buttresses these legal theories.
Ky. Const. Sec. 27, 28, 29; Legislative Research Commission v. Brown, Ky., 664
S.W.2d 907 (1984).
In this context, we review the question before us. The ultimate issue is whether the
system of common schools in the Commonwealth established by the General
Assembly, with respect to the mandate of Section 183, is in compliance with the
constitution. Specifically, we are asked--based solely on the evidence in the record
before us--if the present system of common schools in Kentucky is "efficient" in the
constitutional sense. It is our sworn duty, to decide such questions when they are
before us by applying the constitution. The duty of the judiciary in Kentucky was so
determined when the citizens of Kentucky enacted the social compact called the
Constitution and in it provided for the existence of a third equal branch of
government, the judiciary.
The issue before us--the constitutionality of the system of statutes that created the
common schools--is the only issue. To avoid deciding the case because of "legislative
discretion," "legislative function," etc., would be a denigration of our own
constitutional duty. To allow the General Assembly (or, in point of fact, the
Executive) to decide whether its actions are constitutional is literally unthinkable.
We believe that what these several cases cited as controlling by appellants mean is
that great weight should be given to the decision of the General Assembly. We
believe they mean that the presumption of constitutionality is substantial. We believe
that they mean that legislative discretion--in this specific matter of common schools-is to be given great weight and, we do so in this decision. We do not question the
wisdom of the General Assembly's decision, only its failure to comply with its
constitutional mandate. In so doing, we give deference and weight to the General
Assembly's enactments; however, we find them constitutionally deficient. [FN18]
[FN18. This Court did, in fact, address the constitutionality of a statute
under the mandate of Section 183 in Trustees of Graded Free Colored
Common Schools v. Trustees of Graded Free White Common Schools,
180 Ky. 574, 203 S.W. 520 (1918).]
The judiciary has the ultimate power, and the duty, to apply, interpret, define,
construe all words, phrases, sentences and sections of the Kentucky Constitution as
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents