The Scopes Trial Date and CaseMajor FindingsComments 1925 John Thomas Scopes v. The State of Tennessee (Tennessee Supreme Court) Scopes convicted of teaching human evolution in violation of Tennesse’s Butler Act; Scopes fined $100 (later declared a mis- trial on appeal due to a technicality re. fine) So-called Monkey Trial; American Civil Liberties Union initiated case in an attempt to test the constitution- ality of state’s Butler Act; argued by Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan (former presidential candidate); other states that banned teaching of human evolution included Arkansas and Mississippi; no decision made re. Butler Act (remained in effect until 1967)

U.S. Supreme Court Cases Date and CaseMajor FindingsComments 1968 Epperson v. Arkansas State laws banning teaching of human evolution ruled unconstitutional Unanimous ruling; based on First Amendment, which, according to the Court, “does not permit a state to require that teaching and learning be tailored to the principles or prohibi- tions of any particular religious sect or doctrine”; Mississippi is the last state to nullify ban on teaching human evolution accordingly (1970) 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard Court ruled 7 to 2 that Louisiana’s law requiring balanced treatment for creationism was unconstitutional Like McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, a case regarding “equal time”; Court ruled that creation science “embodies the religious belief that a supernatural creator was responsible for the creation of man- kind”, and that teachers discredit evolution if they counterbalance the teaching of evolution with that of creationism; in minority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia notes that teachers may still present whatever scientific evidence there may be against evolution

Federal Circuit Court Cases Date and CaseMajor FindingsComments 1970 Wright v. Houston Independent School District (Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals) Free exercise of religion is not accompanied by a right to be insulated from scientific findings incompatible with one’s religious beliefs Court dismissed w/o trial, also ruling that: 1) there was no evidence that the school district discouraged the free discussion of ideas, 2) the district had not promoted secularism as a religion, and 3) Wright’s proposed solution of equal-time for creationism was an unwarranted intrusion into the public school systems to control the academic curriculum 1972 Willoughby v. Stever (DC Circuit Court of Appeals) The government can use public funds to promote the teaching of evolution; publicly funded science textbooks may not be tailored to particular religious beliefs William Willoughby, a writer and evangelist, sued the director of the National Science Foundation and others for funding pro-evolution textbooks; he claimed that the use of tax money to support the books was establishing secular humanism as the official religion of the United States; Court dismissed case on the grounds that the textbooks disseminated scientific findings, not religion 1990 Webster v. New Lenox School District #122 (Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals) Teaching creation science in a public school cannot be considered a First Amendment right Court ruled that a school district may ban a teacher from teaching creationism; note that Ray Webster was a social studies (vs. science) teacher

Federal Circuit Court Cases (cont.) Date and CaseMajor FindingsComments 1994 John E. Peloza v. Capistrano Unified School District (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) Evolution is not a religion; a school can require that a teacher teach evolution Peloza, a high-school teacher in So. California, claimed that he was being forced to teach the “religion of evolution”, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education (Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals) Teachers cannot be required by school administrators to read aloud anti-evolution “disclaimers” Court also ruled that proposals for teaching Intelligent Design (ID) were equivalent to those for teaching creation science; disclaimer in this case said that the teaching of evolution was not meant to dissuade students from accepting the biblical version of creation 2010 Association of Christian Schools et al. v. Stearns et al. (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) Admissions policy of University of California (regarding rejection of certain high school biology classes from Christian schools) ruled constitutional and properly applied Plaintiffs objected to UC policy of rejecting biology classes “inconsistent with the viewpoints and knowledge generally accepted in the scientific community”; sued for violations of “freedom of speech, freedom from viewpoint discrimination, freedom from arbitrary discretion, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from hostility toward religion”. US Supreme Court declined to review the case on October 12, 2010

Other Major Cases Date and CaseMajor FindingsComments 1982 McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education (Arkansas Supreme Court) Arkansas Act 590 (“Equal- time Rule”) overruled; creation science ruled as unscientific and religious in nature (as “having no scientific merit or educational value as science”) Case heard by presiding Judge William Overton; decision heavily influenced by courtroom testimony from scientists and philosophers on the nature of scientific theories, and the notable lack of scientists testifying in support of creation science; Overton also ruled that creation science was religious in nature (vis a vis the “Lemon test”) and therefore its inclusion in public school curricula violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution LeVake v. Independent School District No. 656 (Minnesota Court of Appeals) Responsibility to teach evolution according to a school district’s established curriculum overrides a teacher’s First Amendment rights as a private citizen Rodney LeVake, a high-school teacher in Minnesota, was reassigned for teaching “evidence against evolution”; Court ruled that district action was legal since said evidence was not part of the district’s established curriculum; LeVake claimed that evolution was impossible and that there was no evidence to show that it actually occurred; he sued for violation of his First Amendment rights Selman et al. v. Cobb County School Dist. et al. (U.S. District Court of the North District of Georgia) Anti-evolution stickers placed inside the front covers of biology textbooks ruled unconstitutional Sticker read “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”; Judge Clarence Cooper ruled that the sticker unfairly singled out the theory of evolution and failed the Lemon test by effectively endorsing creationism

The Dover Trial Date and CaseMajor FindingsComments 2005 Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District et al. (U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania) Resolution (at right) and “disclaimer” statement written by Dover School Board ruled unconstitutional; Judge John E. Jones III concludes that Intelligent Design (ID) is not science “Students will be made aware of gaps/ problems in Darwin’s theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to, intelligent design. Note: Origins of Life is not taught”. Some pro-ID Board members were found ignorant of ID’s claims; Jones concluded other Defense witnesses had lied. ID Policy “utter waste of monetary and personal resources … breathtakingly inane” courtesy Dr. Kenneth Miller

The Dover Trial Date and CaseMajor FindingsComments 2005 Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District et al. (U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania) Resolution (at right) and “disclaimer” statement written by Dover School Board ruled unconstitutional; Judge John E. Jones III concludes that Intelligent Design (ID) is not science “Students will be made aware of gaps/ problems in Darwin’s theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to, intelligent design. Note: Origins of Life is not taught”. Some pro-ID Board members were found ignorant of ID’s claims; Jones concluded other Defense witnesses had lied. ID Policy “utter waste of monetary and personal resources … breathtakingly inane” “We’ve been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture” Dover Pastor Ray Mummert (emphasis mine) courtesy Dr. Kenneth Miller

So-called Monkey Trial; American Civil Liberties Union initiated case in an attempt to test the constitutionality of state’s Butler Act; argued by Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan (former presidential candidate); other states that banned teaching of human evolution included Arkansas and Mississippi; no decision made re. Butler Act (remained in effect until 1967). Next The first in-flight movie!

Unanimous ruling; based on First Amendment, which, according to the Court, “does not permit a state to require that teaching and learning be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any particular religious sect or doctrine”; Mississippi is the last state to nullify ban on teaching human evolution accordingly (1970). Return Susan Epperson meets John Scopes courtesy Dr. Kenneth Miller

Like McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, a case regarding “equal time”; Court ruled that creation science “embodies the religious belief that a supernatural creator was responsible for the creation of mankind”, and that teachers discredit evolution if they counterbalance the teaching of evolution with that of creationism; in minority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia notes that teachers may still present whatever scientific evidence there may be against evolution. Next

Return Court dismissed w/o trial, also ruling that: 1) there was no evidence that the school district discouraged the free discussion of ideas, 2) the district had not promoted secularism as a religion, and 3) Wright’s proposed solution of equal-time for creationism was an unwarranted intrusion into the public school systems to control the academic curriculum.

Return William Willoughby, a writer and evangelist, sued the director of the National Science Foundation and others for funding pro-evolution textbooks; he claimed that the use of tax money to support the books was establishing secular humanism as the official religion of the United States; Court dismissed case on the grounds that the textbooks disseminated scientific findings, not religion.

Next Court ruled that a school district may ban a teacher from teaching creationism; note that Ray Webster was a social studies (vs. science) teacher.

Peloza, a high-school teacher in So. California, claimed that he was being forced to teach the “religion of evolution”, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Return

Court also ruled that proposals for teaching Intelligent Design (ID) were equivalent to those for teaching creation science; disclaimer in this case said that the teaching of evolution was not meant to dissuade students from accepting the biblical version of creation.

Next Plaintiffs objected to UC policy of rejecting biology classes “inconsistent with the viewpoints and knowledge generally accepted in the scientific community”; sued for violations of “freedom of speech, freedom from viewpoint discrimination, freedom from arbitrary discretion, equal protection of the laws, and freedom from hostility toward religion”. US Supreme Court declined to review the case on October 12, What was the straw that broke the UC camel’s back?

Return Case heard by presiding Judge William Overton; decision heavily influenced by courtroom testimony from scientists and philosophers on the nature of scientific theories, and the notable lack of scientists testifying in support of creation science; Overton also ruled that creation science was religious in nature (vis a vis the “Lemon test”) and therefore its inclusion in public school curricula violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Judge Overton defined science as “what scientists do”.

Return Rodney LeVake, a high-school teacher in Minnesota, was reassigned for teaching “evidence against evolution”; Court ruled that district action was legal since said evidence was not part of the district’s established curriculum; LeVake claimed that evolution was impossible and that there was no evidence to show that it actually occurred; he sued for violation of his First Amendment rights.

Next Sticker read “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”; Judge Clarence Cooper ruled that the sticker unfairly singled out the theory of evolution and failed the Lemon test by effectively endorsing creationism.

“Students will be made aware of gaps/ problems in Darwin’s theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to, intelligent design. Note: Origins of Life is not taught”. Some pro-ID Board members were found ignorant of ID’s claims; Jones concluded other Defense witnesses had lied. ID Policy “utter waste of monetary and personal resources … breathtakingly inane.” courtesy Dr. Kenneth Miller Next

Return “Intelligent Design” is Equivalent to “Creation Science” Barbara Forrest (Southeastern Louisiana Univ.) and Nick Matzke (NCSE) compared 1983, 1986, and 1987 editions of Pandas and People to 1989 and 1993 editions They found that in post-1987 editions, the words “Intelligent Design” or “design” simply replaced “Creation Science”, “creationism”, or “creation” of earlier editions (re. Edwards vs. Aguillard decision): Example: 1986 version’s “Creation means that the various forms of life began abruptly through the agency of an intelligent creator with their distinctive features already intact – fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc.” became … “Intelligent design means 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.” They even found a “missing link” between versions, where a copy-delete-paste mistake had been made trying to change “creationists” to “design proponents”, resulting in … “cdesign proponentists”