Changes

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al., Case # 04cv2688, was a challenge brought in the United States federal court against a public school that required teachers to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution as an explanation of the origins of life.  The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism and the school's policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the Lemon Test. <ref> http://www2.ncseweb.org/kvd/all_legal/2005-12-20_Kitzmiller_decision.pdf </ref> <ref> http://www.nsba.org/site/view.asp?CID=438&DID=37548 </ref>

'''''Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.,''''' Case # 04cv2688, was a challenge brought in the United States federal court against a public school that required teachers to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution as an explanation of the origins of life.  The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism and the school's policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the Lemon Test. <ref> http://www2.ncseweb.org/kvd/all_legal/2005-12-20_Kitzmiller_decision.pdf </ref> <ref> http://www.nsba.org/site/view.asp?CID=438&DID=37548 </ref>

The plaintiffs, eleven parents of students at the Dover Area School District, sued the school board over a statement in support of intelligent design that was to be read aloud during science classes when evolution was taught.  The parents were represented by American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Pepper Hamilton LLP.  The defendants retained the services of the Thomas More Law Center.

The plaintiffs, eleven parents of students at the Dover Area School District, sued the school board over a statement in support of intelligent design that was to be read aloud during science classes when evolution was taught.  The parents were represented by American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Pepper Hamilton LLP.  The defendants retained the services of the Thomas More Law Center.