Changes

'''Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al'''., Case No. 04cv2688, was a lawsuit filed by the [[ACLU]] and the [[Americans United for Separation of Church and State]] in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania against the Dover Area School District to censor any mention of [[intelligent design]] (ID) in [[public school]].  The defendants were the Dover Area School Board who presided over schools in the Dover area that taught approximately 3700 students.  About 1000 students attended Dover High School, the school where the ID policy was placed in effect.<ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf</ref><ref> http://yorkdispatch.inyork.com/searchresults/ci_3535139 </ref>

'''Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al'''., Case No. 04cv2688, was a lawsuit filed by the [[ACLU]] and the [[Americans United for Separation of Church and State]] in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania against the Dover Area School District to censor any mention of [[intelligent design]] (ID) in [[public school]].  The defendants were the Dover Area School Board who presided over schools in the Dover area that taught approximately 3700 students.  About 1000 students attended Dover High School, the school where the ID policy was placed in effect.<ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf</ref><ref> http://yorkdispatch.inyork.com/searchresults/ci_3535139 </ref>

The court completely censored the reading of the proposed statement on [[Intelligent Design]], and approved an award of $2 million in legal fees to the [[ACLU]] and other plaintiffs' attorneys.<ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf</ref>  The court also denied an attempt to intervene in the case by parents who wanted the ID statement, and entered an order foreclosing any appeal of his final ruling.  Taxpayers in the district paid $1,000,011 of the massive legal fee award to the [[ACLU]] and other plaintiffs' attorneys.<ref> http://www.umt.edu/mlr/editors'%20note.pdf </ref>

The court completely censored the reading of the proposed statement on [[Intelligent Design]], and approved an award of $2 million in legal fees to the [[ACLU]] and other plaintiffs' attorneys.<ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf</ref>  The court also denied an attempt to intervene in the case by parents who wanted the ID statement, and entered an order foreclosing any appeal of his final ruling.{{fact}} Taxpayers in the district paid $1,000,011 of the massive legal fee award to the [[ACLU]] and other plaintiffs' attorneys.<ref> http://www.umt.edu/mlr/editors'%20note.pdf </ref>

On December 20, 2005, Judge [[John E. Jones III]] rendered his verdict and ruled the Dover ID policy violated the Establishment Clause of the [[First Amendment]] of the [[Constitution of the United States]] and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.  The court summarized in stating, "The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause.  In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science.  We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."  Judge Jones held that "the disclaimer singles out the theory of evolution for special treatment, misrepresents its status in the scientific community, causes students to doubt its validity without scientific justification, presents students with a religious alternative masquerading as a scientific theory, directs them to consult a creationist text as though it were a science resource, and instructs students to forego scientific inquiry in the public school classroom and instead to seek out religious instruction elsewhere."  The defendants were permanently enjoined from maintaining the ID policy in any school within the Dover Area School District. <ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf  </ref>  

On December 20, 2005, Judge [[John E. Jones III]] rendered his verdict and ruled the Dover ID policy violated the Establishment Clause of the [[First Amendment]] of the [[Constitution of the United States]] and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.  The court summarized in stating, "The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause.  In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science.  We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."  Judge Jones held that "the disclaimer singles out the theory of evolution for special treatment, misrepresents its status in the scientific community, causes students to doubt its validity without scientific justification, presents students with a religious alternative masquerading as a scientific theory, directs them to consult a creationist text as though it were a science resource, and instructs students to forego scientific inquiry in the public school classroom and instead to seek out religious instruction elsewhere."  The defendants were permanently enjoined from maintaining the ID policy in any school within the Dover Area School District. <ref> http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf  </ref>