Topeka ? Those 15 words from the Kansas Constitution, and similar provisions in other states’ constitutions, have prompted a series of lawsuits that is shaking the foundation of public school funding in the United States.

“It’s pervasive, and it will continue to be so,” Steve Smith, a senior education policy analyst with the National Conference of State Legislatures, said of legal challenges to school finance in 25 states.

“We have a very high-stakes environment in education right now over student performance and schools are being held accountable with some very serious sanctions for not performing,” he said.

Across the nation, state courts are grappling with accusations that elected officials are shortchanging their school systems, usually to the detriment of disadvantaged students who need help the most.

Many school finance experts say the lawsuits are descendants of the historic 1954 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education that ended segregation.

Adding fuel to the juggernaut is the federal No Child Left Behind Act, which requires improvements in student performance school building by school building throughout the country.

In Kansas, a state district court judge has declared that the Kansas system of funding the $4 billion public school system is in “blatant violation” of the state and federal constitutions.

Judge Terry Bullock gave the Legislature until July 1 to correct the system. Lawmakers failed to act, so Bullock said he would order funding shut off. The Kansas Supreme Court halted that order and scheduled arguments on the case for Aug. 30. A ruling is expected in the fall.

Richard Levy, a constitutional law professor at Kansas University, said much of the attention on Bullock’s order had focused on the judge’s finding that not enough was being spent on schools. In his opinion, Bullock cited a study commissioned by the Legislature that would require an additional $1 billion in school funding.

But Levy said two important issues that Bullock addresses, which get less attention, zero in on how the state decides how much to spend on education, and how that money is distributed.

“Probably more important for the Legislature to address is that there is no rational explanation or basis for how the funds are allocated from district to district,” Levy said.

Calling it quits: The state of education in Kansas Photo gallery: School closings Funding equation creates division (7-13-04) Kansas not alone in legal challenge (7-13-04) 6News video: Summer school starts up for district students (7-12-04) Budget woes color every facet of school life (7-12-04) Districts struggle as aid stays flat (7-11-04) We support schools* (7-11-04) Program cuts have harmed schools, governor says (7-11-04)

Bullock’s opinion said the amount of the check written by the Legislature to public schools was based on political negotiations instead of how much was actually needed to educate students. That process might be OK for the state’s funding of various agencies, but not for a constitutionally mandated school system, supporters of the lawsuit say.

Levy also notes that Bullock spent a lot of time addressing the disparate impact of a funding system that provides more dollars to wealthy school districts.

“The amount of funding per student available is almost inversely proportional to their needs,” Levy said of the ruling.

And he noted that there is a question on what the Kansas Supreme Court can do if it upholds Bullock’s ruling. Can it order a tax increase, or hold lawmakers in contempt of court if they fail to do something? “There are no clear answers,” Levy said.

Compounding the difficulty in resolving school finance litigation is the fact that states have been suffering their worst budgetary shortfalls since World War II, said Smith, of the National Conference of State Legislatures.

“It has been the perfect storm with funding requirements of No Child Left Behind, people suing the states at every corner,” he said. “It has been a challenge.”