CONCORD, N.H. (MyKeeneNow) The State of New Hampshire has formally asked the New Hampshire Supreme Court to overturn the landmark Claremont school funding decisions, setting up a potential constitutional showdown over who bears responsibility for paying for public education.

In a notice of appeal filed in the Rand school funding case, state attorneys urged the court to reverse its 1993 ruling in Claremont School District v. Governor and subsequent decisions that established the state’s duty to define, fund and guarantee an adequate education for every child.

According to a press release issued by the NH School Funding Fairness Project, the filing asks the justices to reject the long-standing interpretation of Part II, Article 83 of the New Hampshire Constitution. The state argues that the constitutional provision does not require courts to enforce a qualitative standard of education or mandate a specific funding structure.

The appeal also asks the court to overturn its 1997 Claremont II decision and instead adopt the reasoning from a dissenting opinion in that case — a step that school funding advocates say would dismantle three decades of precedent.

“For years, some lawmakers and state leaders have said they were not trying to overturn Claremont,” Zack Sheehan, executive director of the NH School Funding Fairness Project, said in a news release. “In this filing, the State is formally asking the Supreme Court to do exactly that.”

Sheehan said the timing of the appeal raises concerns, as lawmakers are simultaneously advancing legislation that would alter how the state defines its education responsibilities.

House Bill 1815 and Senate Bill 659 would revise key sections of the state’s adequacy laws. Among other changes, the measures would remove language guaranteeing students the “opportunity” for an adequate education and describe public education as an integrated system of shared responsibility, without clearly outlining the state’s financial obligation.

“When the State asks the Supreme Court to overrule Claremont while lawmakers advance bills redefining education as a vague ‘shared responsibility,’ it raises serious questions about the direction of school funding policy in New Hampshire,” Sheehan said in the release. He added that adjusting statutory language does not eliminate what he described as a long-recognized constitutional duty.

Sheehan also argued that undoing Claremont would not address property tax disparities or increase resources for students. Eliminating the precedent, he said, would not solve inequities between districts that rely heavily on local property taxes to fund schools.

Claremont’s Financial Struggles in Focus

The legal push comes as the Claremont School District continues to manage the fallout from a $5 million budget gap discovered last summer. The shortfall, tied to an incorrect assumption about anticipated federal funds, forced the district to secure a private loan to maintain operations.

In early February, district leaders signaled they may decline a proposed state revolving loan program designed to provide early access to adequacy payments. Under the latest version of House Bill 292, districts could borrow from the state but would have to repay the funds with interest, submit to additional financial oversight, and comply with expanded reporting requirements. Families in participating districts would also receive priority access to the state’s Education Freedom Account program.

Interim business administrator Matt Angell told board members in January he hoped the district could finish the fiscal year without further borrowing. Some board members have questioned whether the state loan terms are favorable, particularly given that Claremont already secured financing from a local bank at a lower interest rate.

The district’s financial crisis has also been cited in broader debates over the adequacy formula and the state’s reliance on local property taxes. Last fall, attorney Andru Volinsky, who has long been involved in Claremont-related litigation, warned on WKBK Radio that systemic funding problems were pushing some districts to the brink and called for broader tax reform.

What Comes Next

For more than 30 years, the New Hampshire Supreme Court has held that the state must define an adequate education, determine its cost and fund it using constitutional taxation.

Now, as the justices consider the state’s appeal, that framework could be revisited.

“The constitutional standard has been clear for more than 30 years,” Sheehan said in the press release. “The solution to high and unequal property taxes isn’t to erase that standard — it’s to meet it.”

Whether the court agrees could shape the future of public education funding across New Hampshire — and determine how districts like Claremont navigate the financial challenges ahead.