A civil trial with the potential to shake up the S.C. public school financing system came quietly to an end in Manning earlier this month. The plaintiffs, eight local school boards from poor rural school districts, want Circuit Judge Thomas Cooper to rule that the General Assembly shortchanges the children in their care.

If he does and appellate courts back him up, there could follow a court-ordered shake-up of the system that delivers state and local tax money to the state's 85 school boards. The effects would be felt statewide, including here.

Legislative leaders argue that the current school-finance system is fair and constitutional. Under that system, S.C. legislators supplement local school property-tax revenue, with state payments distributed in reverse proportion to a given district's wealth.

If Cooper rules on such technical grounds, the plaintiff school boards well might lose. But if he rules that legislators effectively deprive kids in poor, rural districts of learning opportunities accorded to kids in better-financed districts - Horry County, for example - Cooper could agree that the system is unconstitutional.

Make no mistake: The eight plaintiff school districts - and the many more with comparable demographics - do get a raw deal. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-Seneca, has noted the learning disparities that result when poor kids in poor communities attend school in substandard classrooms with underpaid teachers. In a fairer world, court prodding would not be necessary to "persuade" legislators and Gov. Mark Sanford to fix this disparity.

But a fix - voluntary or court-ordered - likely would increase state and local school taxes. South Carolina is a poor state, so there's not a lot of money to spare in government coffers or in taxpayers' pockets. That's the harsh reality against which Cooper's decision - whatever it is - ultimately will be judged.