Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
link
Line 16: Line 16:     
== Criticism==
 
== Criticism==
−
Immediately after the ruling in favor of the plaintiffs, Judge Jones, a Republican appointed by President Bush, was accused of judicial activism. <ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/judge_jones_admits_the_activis.html </ref>  
+
Immediately after the ruling in favor of the plaintiffs, Judge Jones, a Republican appointed by President Bush, was accused of [[judicial activism]]. <ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/judge_jones_admits_the_activis.html </ref>  
 
{{quotebox|[[Discovery Institute]]: Judge Jones's Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design. Despite Judge Jones's protestations to the contrary, his attempt to use the federal bench to declare evolution a sacred cow turns out to be a textbook case of good-old-American judicial activism. [http://www.discovery.org/csc/traipsing/]}}
 
{{quotebox|[[Discovery Institute]]: Judge Jones's Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design. Despite Judge Jones's protestations to the contrary, his attempt to use the federal bench to declare evolution a sacred cow turns out to be a textbook case of good-old-American judicial activism. [http://www.discovery.org/csc/traipsing/]}}
 
Despite the accusations that he admitted to making an activist ruling, he actually preempted his critics by stating; "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court.  Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board’s decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."  <ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf  </ref>     
 
Despite the accusations that he admitted to making an activist ruling, he actually preempted his critics by stating; "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court.  Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board’s decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."  <ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf  </ref>     
300

edits

Navigation menu