In the past twelve months, COVID-19-related lockdowns and school closures have highlighted education achievement gaps throughout Minnesota and brought increased attention to the struggles facing families in failing public schools. In response to this, Minnesota lawmakers recently proposed an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution stating that all children have a “fundamental right” to a public education. Unfortunately, the proposed amendment offers no real solutions but instead threatens parental rights in Minnesota and doubles down on failed educational policies by providing legal pressure to pour more taxpayer funding into them.
Proposed by retired Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page and Minneapolis Federal Reserve head Neel Kashkari, the Page Amendment would add a right to a public education in the Minnesota Constitution. Currently, Minnesota’s constitution says,
The stability of a republican form of government depending mainly upon the intelligence of the people, it is the duty of the legislature to establish a general and uniform system of public schools. The legislature shall make such provisions by taxation or otherwise as will secure a thorough and efficient system of public schools throughout the state.
The Page Amendment would replace this with,
All children have a fundamental right to a quality public education that fully prepares them with the skills necessary for participation in the economy, our democracy, and society, as measured against uniform achievement standards set forth by the state. It is a paramount duty of the state to ensure quality public schools that fulfill this fundamental right.
Rather than simply directing the legislature to establish and maintain a public education system, as our state constitution currently does, the Page Amendment would make a “fundamental” right to a public education the paramount duty of the state and would evaluate whether that right is being fulfilled based on a uniform set of achievement standards set forth by the state. It sounds benign, but declaring public education to be a “fundamental right” is legal code for giving the state an excuse to take over control and funding of local schools.
Not only does this move control away from the local level, but it gives ultimate responsibility over a child’s education to the state of Minnesota, and more specifically the Minnesota Supreme Court, rather than recognizing that a child’s education is ultimately their parents’ responsibility, regardless of which educational options a family pursues.
The Page Amendment poses potential legal concerns for the future of homeschooling in Minnesota, as well as for parental rights. Introducing a “right to education” puts parents at a disadvantage if they oppose what is being taught in their children’s schools. If a parent objects what their child’s school is teaching, this amendment would make it possible for the school to argue that the parent is objecting to or attempting to violate their child’s educational rights.
Under the Equal Protection Clause, all Minnesota kids already have a right to high-quality education. If schools are failing to provide a quality education, a constitutional amendment is not going to solve the problem. Instead, real reforms will need to come from the legislature and from individual schools and local school boards.
Minnesota’s public schools have woefully failed minority and low-income families during the COVID-19 pandemic. The solution to this is not a constitutional amendment that does nothing to actually address the problems in our public schools. Instead, Minnesota ought to prioritize school choice and equip families with greater access to better schooling options—this would do far more to address Minnesota’s achievement gap.
Minnesota’s families need real solutions. They do not need an amendment that threatens parental rights while doing nothing to address actual failures in our education system.
