|
THE LEGAL BEAT: A Setback in Dover
By Josh Dunn and Martha Derthick
Last rites for Intelligent Design
Will Judge John Jones’s blunt, much-publicized,
year-end opinion in Kitzmiller v. Dover, a Pennsylvania case on Intelligent Design (ID), be the end
of lawsuits over ID or the beginning of a wave?
Kitzmiller was
launched after the school board in Dover, a town outside Harrisburg with
just 3,600 students, voted to require the district’s 9th-grade
biology teachers to read to their students a four-paragraph statement advising them that evolution is a theory,
“not a fact.” The board told teachers to refer students
to Of Pandas and People, a text favored by many creationists that defines
ID as the belief “that various forms of life began abruptly
through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features
already intact—fish with fins and scales, birds with
feathers, beaks, and wings, etc.” A more usual definition
holds merely that ID finds some organic matter to be of
“irreducible complexity” and thus not explicable as a
product of evolution.
Eleven local parents (one named Kitzmiller)
sued, with help from the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans
United for Separation of Church and State, and an elite
Philadelphia law firm, Pepper Hamilton. The suit claimed that the
board’s action violated the First Amendment ban on
establishment of religion.
The defendants were badly beaten on every
front. In November, soon after the six-week, non-jury trial ended,
the Dover electorate voted eight of the school board’s nine
members out of office. The following month they were beaten again
by Judge Jones, whose 139-page opinion called the board’s ID
decision religiously motivated and accused it of
“breathtaking inanity.” Jones said that ID was not
science. He also ordered that the school district pay the
plaintiffs’ legal costs. Pepper Hamilton hinted that it might
send bills to individual board members who voted for the ID
statement.
The defeats, along with the turmoil caused by
hordes of reporters from far-flung places, are likely to make other
local boards hesitate before raising even timid questions about
evolution. At the least, a prudent board might want to have the
backing of the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based nonprofit and a
principal proponent of ID, which had distanced itself from the
Dover defense, perhaps anticipating the loss. The defendants
were instead represented by Richard Thompson of the Thomas More Law
Center of Ann Arbor, Michigan, which is dedicated to protecting the religious freedoms
of Christians.
Earlier in the year a Cobb County, Georgia,
school board was similarly rebuffed by a federal district judge.
The Georgia board had ordered that a sticker be attached to biology
textbooks stating, “This textbook contains material on
evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin
of living things. This material should be approached with an open
mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.” The
judge in that case ruled that the statement was an unconstitutional
endorsement of religion because it was supported by religious
opponents of evolution. Unlike Dover, however, the Cobb County
board survived to file an appeal, which was being heard by the 11th
Circuit as Jones handed down his opinion.
Will there be fresh lawsuits in the wake of Kitzmiller? The victors
appear ready to turn to state school boards, where proponents of ID
have made the most headway. State boards in Kansas and Ohio, among
others, have adopted science standards that call for critical
analysis of evolution. The day after Jones ruled, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported
that Americans United had obtained boxes of records from the Ohio
Department of Education and was threatening a lawsuit. “We
hope Ohio takes notice and cleans house,” said an official of
Americans United.
There remains the question of what the
litigation, no matter the outcome or opinions, means for science
education, and beyond that whether science education has much
effect on what Americans believe. Polls show that an overwhelming
majority of Americans believe in a providential being and are
skeptical about evolution. Critics of evolution seem to be fighting
a battle that they have already won.
Josh Dunn is assistant professor of political
science, the University of Colorado–Colorado Springs.
Martha Derthick is professor emeritus of
American government, the University of Virginia.
|