Massachusetts is meeting its constitutional requirement to provide students with an adequate education and does not have to overhaul its school funding formula, the state's highest court ruled in a closely watched case in February 2005. The February 15 decision by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court surprised many observers, who had expected the court to be swayed by a lower-court ruling last spring that the aid system shortchanged the 19 plaintiff districts. In that 358-page decision, Suffolk County Superior Court Judge Margot Botsford said that the finance method contributed to crowded classrooms, inadequate facilities, and uneven implementation of state academic standards. She recommended the state determine how much it would cost to bring the districts up to an adequate level, increase funding for special education, and improve school facilities. But in the February 5-2 decision, the state supreme court ruled that despite the considerable challenges the districts face, Massachusetts has invested $30 billion in public schools over the past decade and continues to narrow funding gaps between poor and wealthy districts. "While the plaintiffs have amply shown that many children in the focus districts are not being well served by their school districts, they have not shown that the defendants are acting in an arbitrary, nonresponsive, or irrational way to meet the constitutional mandate," Justice Marshall wrote in the majority opinion.