Our legal system: How it works
John Haynes’ recent New Mexican op-ed piece (“Education spending, a judge and democracy,” My View, Aug. 5) was brought to my attention, and its troublesome and erroneous depiction of the role of the judiciary in our system of government compelled me to respond.
Haynes’ comments on the eight-week trial just concluded before First District Judge Sarah Singleton, which challenges whether our system of public education is being conducted in compliance with the constitutional requirement that the state maintain “a uniform system of free public schools sufficient for the education of … all the children of school age in the state.”
The writer contends that the plaintiffs in the lawsuit want the judge to “declare herself a benevolent dictator and order a massive increase in state educational spending, overriding the budget adopted by the Legislature and the governor,” and that if the judge affords relief to the plaintiffs, “it will be a massive blow to democratic governance in New Mexico,” because “the will of a single judge … will override the elected Legislature and elected governor.”
Of course, this is not how our democracy is structured, and the writer either misunderstands or chooses to ignore the court’s role in deciding whether our New Mexico Constitution’s guarantee of a “uniform” and “sufficient” public education for all our children has been violated.
Fortunately for all of us, there are three co-equal branches of government that operate in a system of checks and balances. In order to check the tyranny of the majority, which, throughout history, has too often trampled on fundamental constitutional guarantees and the rights of disadvantaged minorities, the courts have been given the essential role to protect those important rights and disadvantaged citizens.
Furthermore, once the trial court rules on what the guaranty of a “uniform” and “sufficient” system of public education means and what is required to satisfy that constitutional provision, its ruling will then be reviewed by New Mexico’s appellate courts. This is the essence of democracy under our system of checks and balances. In the end, it will fall to the governor and the Legislature — who are sworn to uphold the constitution — to implement the ultimate ruling of our courts.
The U.S. Supreme Court has explained the courts’ responsibility as follows: “The very purpose of a Bill of Rights [and other protections in the Constitution] was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, (1943)
Following that lead, the New Mexico Supreme Court also has made clear: “When government is alleged to have threatened any of these rights, it is the responsibility of the courts to interpret and apply the protections of the Constitution. Thus, when litigants allege that the government has unconstitutionally interfered with a right protected by the Bill of Rights, or has unconstitutionally discriminated against them, courts must decide the merits of the allegation. If proven, courts must safeguard constitutional rights and order an end to the discriminatory treatment.” Griego v. Oliver (2013)
The country’s Founding Fathers understood that a democracy rests on an educated public, and the framers of our state constitution agreed, committing the state to provide a “uniform” and “sufficient” system of public education as a foundation of our democracy, regardless of the politics of the moment. They understood that we need an informed and educated electorate to participate in our political system and to create a workforce that can attract new businesses to sustain a vibrant economy and democracy in New Mexico. We are all fortunate to live in a country and a state in which it falls to the judiciary to protect all such constitutional guarantees.