Question

In 2016, the texas supreme court held that the existing system for funding public schools met the minimum constitutional provisions for

Answer 1

The Supreme Court has ruled on various cases regarding public school funding to ensure accessibility and equity in education, setting legal precedents for universal access, accountability systems, and federal aid for secular education in religious schools.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question refers to the decisions made by the judiciary concerning the funding of public schools and how it aligns with the minimum constitutional provisions for education. Over the years, several landmark cases such as Brown v. The Board of Education, Lemon v. Kurtzman, and Mills v. Board of Education have set precedents for how public education should be funded and who gets access to it. For instance, Mills v. Board of Education established a precedent for universal access to education, ruling against the notion that higher costs could justify denying education to children with special needs.

Equity in school funding remains a contentious issue as local property taxes often contribute to inequality in educational resources, particularly affecting low-income communities. As a response to inequities and underperformance, laws like the No Child Left Behind Act mandated that all students, regardless of the school they attend, must meet certain educational standards, providing accountability systems and potentially corrective actions for schools that fail to achieve them. The Supreme Court has also ruled in Agostini v. Felton that federal aid can be used for teaching secular subjects in private religious schools without violating the Establishment Clause, thereby tending to the needs of underprivileged students while trying to maintain the balance between Establishment, Liberty, and Order.

Answer 2

The answer to the question is pretty much in the question itself. At issue was whether the funding system for public schools in Texas was meeting the minimum constitutional standard for funding public schools, and the court said yes. The legal challenges to the funding plan were claims like:
... The funding provided by the Legislature was insufficient to ensure that students would meet academic standards.
... Large differences in funding were seen between rich and poor school districts. (Rich and poor based on property values, and property taxes were the main funding mechanism for schools.)

The funding system passed at the Texas Supreme Court level, but barely. There generally remains a feeling that more must be done to fund all schools more adequately, but at least the bare minimum was seen (by the court) as being done.