"Thank you in advance for your views on how much an &lsquoadequate education&rsquo costs, but we are really not interested. It is no more legitimate for the judiciary, under the guise of interpreting the Constitution, to tell the legislature how to set educational policy than it is for the legislature, under the guise of passing legislation, to tell the judiciary how it must define freedom of speech. If you wish to affect educational policy, you of course are free to do so, but you must do so in the same way every other person in New Hampshire does so, at the ballot-box, at town meetings, and at parent-teacher meetings.

However, since you were kind enough to give us your views on educational policy, we thought we would give you our views on your Claremont decisions. In brief, they are irreconcilable with the text, structure and history of our constitution. For example, you said that the word "cherish" in Part II, Article 83, (where you located a supposed duty on the part of the State to fund education), means to fund, but elsewhere in our Constitution the word "support" is used to mean fund.

Also, if our framers had really intended an "adequate education" to be a constitutional right, wouldn&rsquot they have said so in the same way they declared other constitutional rights, that is, by expressly calling them rights in Part I of our Constitution, the Bill of Rights? Additionally, how come you ignored all that precedent that says the State is under no constitutional duty to provide any education, let alone an adequate education, and you didn&rsquot even discuss the Constitutional Convention of 1850 where it was proposed that Part II, Article 83 be moved to the Bill of Rights and that language be added expressly making education a constitutional right, but that this proposal was rejected?"

Mosca notes that by returning to court, Volinsky and company have given the people of New Hampshire an opportunity to engage in a meaningful debate about the Claremont decisions. Such as which branch of government, under our Constitution, has the power to set educational policy and fto determine how much of the people's money must be spent on education versus other social services - the people's duly elected representatives who stand accountable to the people every two years at the ballot box or five unelected, unaccountable lawyers.- 30-