This review of the history of school finance litigation highlights various rulings of the courts and the ways that legal strategies have changed over time. Originally the school finance cases were based on the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the argument being that differences in per pupil spending had to be related to differences in student need. This was rejected by the courts on the grounds that a clear standard for assessing the education needs of pupils did not exist. Litigation strategies then focused on inputs to the education process, arguing that differences in the abilities of school districts to provide resources diminished opportunities in poor school districts. The student-need argument has reemerged more recently, and state school finance systems are being challenged on the basis of failure to structure funding systems to guarantee a thorough and efficient or ample education for all. Reviews of recent court cases are included. (MD)