亨利·卡尔维豪斯/《Mountain State Spotlight》 2025年4月，西弗吉尼亚州立法机构通过了一项法律，该法律赋予其修改州教育委员会规章的权力。
HENRY CULVYHOUSE/Mountain State Spotlight In April 2025, the West Virginia Legislature passed a law that would give itself power over state Board of Education regulations.
此前，选民曾两次否决过那些旨在将教育政策制定权交给立法机构的宪法修正案提案。尽管如此，立法机构仍坚持推进这项法律，并表示他们打算通过法律途径引发诉讼，以便由西弗吉尼亚州上诉法院来裁决此事。
Voters have twice defeated constitutional amendment proposals that would have given the Legislature control. Lawmakers proceeded anyway, saying at the time they intended to trigger a lawsuit, so the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals would have to decide.
去年10月，教育委员会正式向法院提起诉讼，案件于本周二开庭审理。
The school board filed suit in October of last year, and on Tuesday, the case came before the court.
根据西弗吉尼亚州宪法，州教育委员会拥有广泛的权力，可以决定从课程设置到学生上下公交车等所有与教育相关的事宜。虽然其他州级机构和委员会也可以制定相关规则，但每当这些规则被提出时，立法机构都有机会在规则正式生效前对其进行修改。
Under the West Virginia Constitution, the state school board has wide powers to determine educational policy, from curriculum to the proper way for students to board a bus. Other state agencies and boards can set rules, but whenever those rules are proposed, lawmakers get a chance to tweak them before they go into effect.
例如，西弗吉尼亚州自然资源部门曾提交过一项需要立法机构批准的规则，该规则涉及设立疫情控制区域以及处理患病动物的尸体等问题。
For instance, the Department of Natural Resources submitted a rule for legislative approval that sets up containment areas and disposes of carcasses for diseased animals .
然而，州教育委员会是个例外——1958年，经过选民投票通过的一项宪法修正案后，教育委员会成为了一个独立机构，对全州的教育事务拥有全面监管权。该委员会将其制定的规则提交给了州务卿办公室，并由官方正式公布。
The state school board is an exception. In 1958, the school board became an independent body with general supervision over schools, after voters approved a constitutional amendment. The board filed its rules with the Secretary of State’s Office, and those rules were published in the State.
多年来，教育委员会的权力一直受到挑战。1988年，立法机构曾通过一项法律，试图剥夺教育委员会的决策权（即要求立法机构必须审查教育委员会制定的所有政策）；如果立法机构未进行审查，这些政策将被视为无效。不过，州最高法院以该法律违反宪法为由将其废除了。这一裁决源于教育委员会针对时任州务卿肯·赫克勒（Ken Hechler）提起的诉讼。
Over the years, the school board’s authority has been challenged. In 1988, the Legislature passed a law that would effectively give the Legislature the ability to review any policies passed by the school board. If the Legislature didn’t review the policy, then it was nullified. The state Supreme Court struck that law down, ruling it violated the state Constitution, in a case brought by the Board of Education against then-Secretary of State Ken Hechler.
2025年，来自伯克利选区的共和党州众议员迈克·霍恩比提出一项法案，要求学区教育委员会像大多数其他州政府机构一样，将规则提交州议会审议。他说，他明知这样做会引发诉讼也依然提出了这项法案。“我确实认为最高法院判错了。”霍恩比说。州议员通过了这项法案。
In 2025, Del. Mike Hornby, R-Berkeley, introduced a bill to force the school board to submit its rules before the Legislature, like most other state agencies. He said he did so knowing this would spark a court challenge. “I do believe the Supreme Court got it wrong,” Hornby said. Lawmakers passed the bill.
同年晚些时候，在州务卿办公室将学区教育委员会一项有关校车设计的规则提交州议会而非予以公布后，该委员会提起了诉讼。1958年的宪法修正案旨在将教育与党派政治分开。
Later that year, the school board filed suit after the Secretary of State’s Office referred one of its rules regarding school bus design to the Legislature instead of publishing it. The 1958 constitutional amendment was intended to separate education from partisan politics.
上一次就是否让州议会对学区教育委员会的政策拥有最终决定权的问题付诸表决时，反对该做法的人警告称，这会为政治人物将其意识形态诉求强加于学生的教学方式打开方便之门。选民赞同了这一点，而且连续两次都是如此。
The last time the question of letting the Legislature have the final say over school board policy came to a vote, opponents cautioned that it would open the door to allowing politicians to impose their ideological will on how students are taught. Voters agreed. Twice.
1989年，选民以9比1的差距否决了一项由州长加斯东·卡佩顿支持的宪法修正案。该修正案拟让州议会和州长监督学区教育委员会。2022年，58%的选民否决了州议会提出的类似提案。
Voters rejected an amendment supported by Gov. Gaston Caperton in 1989 to give the Legislature and the governor oversight of the school board by a 9-to-1 margin. In 2022, 58% of voters rejected a similar proposal offered by the Legislature .
但霍恩比说，他从未打算接管学区教育委员会，甚至无意过问课程事务。作为立法规则审查委员会和教育问责立法监督委员会的成员，霍恩比表示，他希望能够与学区教育委员会更密切地合作制定政策。
But Hornby said it was never his intention to take over the school board, or even to look at matters of curriculum. As a member of the Legislative Rulemaking Review Committee and the Legislative Oversight Commission on Educational Accountability, Hornby said he wanted to be able to work more closely with the school board in crafting policy.
“关于学校资助公式、纪律管理和助教人员，我们想说什么都可以，”他说，“但如果我们不能与教育部协作，确保他们通过的规定符合西弗吉尼亚州的标准和最佳实践，那我就看不出这样做有什么意义。”如果霍恩比提出的法律得到维持，州议员将可以否决教育委员会提交的规则，或对其进行根本性修改。然而，州教育委员会认为，这类监督违背了选民的意愿和州宪法。
“We can say all we want about school aid formulas, discipline, aides,” he said. “But if we can’t collaboratively work with the Department of Education to ensure that the rules that they’re passing meet what the standards and what the best practices are for West Virginia, then I don’t see the point.”If Hornby’s law prevails, then lawmakers would have the option to strike rules offered by the Board of Education, or radically alter them. However, the state school board argues that this kind of oversight is contrary to the will of the voters and the state constitution.
教育委员会在2025年7月提起诉讼前发布的一份声明中表示：“此外，要求由州立法机关审查WVBE政策，将造成延误，不利于学生的成功和福祉。”
“Additionally, requiring WVBE policies to be reviewed by the State Legislature will result in delays that will be detrimental to student success and well-being,” the board said in a statement released in July 2025 prior to filing its suit.
州最高法院于周二开庭，听取关于立法机关监督教育委员会制定规则权限的双方陈述。
The state Supreme Court met Tuesday to hear arguments about legislative authority over Board of Education rulemaking.
尽管州宪法赋予教育委员会一般监督权，但也规定，“立法机关应通过一般法律建立完善、高效的免费学校体系。”代表州务卿的州司法部律师迈克尔·威廉姆斯 argued 称，州宪法并未赋予行政机构不受立法监督、可自行决定规则的绝对权力。他说，最终决定权掌握在立法机关手中。
While the state constitution gives the school board general supervision, it also says that “the Legislature shall provide, by general law, for a thorough and efficient system of free schools.”The state constitution doesn’t give an executive agency carte blanche to decide its own rules without Legislative oversight, argued Michael Williams, an Attorney General lawyer representing the Secretary of State. He said ultimately, the Legislature gets the final say.
威廉姆斯表示：“本院曾裁定，只要不撤销相关职位，也不使其职能被架空，立法机关便可以规范职责的履行方式。”
“This court has held that it lets the Legislature regulate how duties are performed, so long as it doesn’t abolish the office or empty out its functions,” Williams said.
威廉姆斯称，新法律与1988年的法律不同之处在于，它赋予立法者批准、修改或否决拟议规则的权利；但如果立法者未能在15个月内对某项规则进行表决，该规则将自动获得批准。根据此前的法律，如果立法者未对某项规则进行表决，该规则将被否决。
Williams said the new law differs from the 1988 law in that it gives legislators a chance to approve, amend or reject the proposed rules, but if they don’t vote on the rule within 15 months, it is automatically approved. In the previous law, if legislators didn’t vote on a rule it was rejected.
代表州教育委员会的律师克里斯·史密斯认为，宪法赋予教育委员会对学校的一般监督权，州最高法院也已在1988年的教育委员会诉赫克勒案中明确了这一点。
Attorney Chris Smith, representing the state Board of Education, argued that the constitution gives the school board general supervision over schools, and that the state’s Supreme Court had already decided this in the 1988 case in the Board of Education case against Hechler.
史密斯表示，此前的判例意味着，政府的一个部门不能自行取得对另一个部门权限的否决权。“这是基本的权力分立原则。”史密斯说。
Smith said the previous case means that one branch of government can’t give itself veto power over another’s power. “That’s basic separation of powers principles,” Smith said.
前州参议员查尔斯·特朗普指出，立法机构始终有权通过法律来推翻学校董事会制定的规则。
Justice Charles Trump, a former state senator, noted that the Legislature always has the option to pass a law that would override a rule by the school board.
史密斯承认了这一点，但他表示唯一的例外是：立法机构无权直接修改或制定学校董事会的规则。
Smith acknowledged that point, but said the exception there is that the Legislature just can’t touch rulemaking.
“虽然这种方式并不总是遵守宪法的最有效途径，但这是选民们的意愿。”他说。
“It’s not always the most efficient route to comply with the Constitution, but it’s what the voters wanted,” he said.
需要说明的是：贝利与格拉瑟律师事务所（Bailey & Glasser）在此案中代表州教育委员会；该律师事务所的联合创始人本·贝利（Ben Bailey）同时也是《Mountain State Spotlight》杂志董事会的主席。
Disclosure: The law firm Bailey & Glasser represents the state Board of Education in this case. One of the firm’s co-founders, Ben Bailey, is chairman of Mountain State Spotlight’s board of directors.
这篇报道最初由《Mountain State Spotlight》杂志发布，并通过与美联社（The Associated Press）的合作进行了传播。
This story was originally published by Mountain State Spotlight and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.