The Court determined that (1) Article 11, Section 1 of the Nevada Constitution does not limit the Legislature’s discretion in encouraging other methods of education, and based on this, the Education Savings Account (“ESA”) program is not contrary to Article 11, Section 2 which requires the Legislature to “provide for a uniform system of common schools”; and that (2) the funds deposited in the education savings account are not “public funds” subject to Article 11, Section 10; and finally that (3) the ESA program violates the mandate under Section 2 and 6 to fund public education because SB 302 does not operate as an appropriation bill, and nothing in SB 515 provides an appropriation for education savings accounts.
Cardenas, Scott, "Schwartz v. Lopez, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 73 (Sep. 29, 2016)" (2016). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1009.