Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2009
ISSN
2154-6436
Publisher
University of St. Thomas Journal of Law & Public Policy
Language
en-US
Abstract
A few years ago, at a conference on religion in the public schools sponsored by the First Amendment Law Review at the University of North Carolina, I argued that although I thought Judge Jones' opinion in Kitzmiller' was mostly correct, the judge erred by deciding that Intelligent Design (ID) is not science. Although I continue to believe that teaching ID in public schools is unconstitutional-I have argued this point for a dozen years and will not reiterate my reasoning here -I also continue to agree with my original assessment of the judge's treatment of the so-called "is it science?" question. In other words, I continue to believe that this particular aspect of the decision was unnecessary, unjustified (the judge did not explain why he was deciding the question), in excess of the judicial role, and unpersuasive, given the judge's lack of training in the philosophy of science.
Recommended Citation
Jay D. Wexler,
Intelligent Design and Judicial Minimalism: Further Thoughts on the 'Is It Science?' Question
,
in
4
University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy
30
(2009).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/1706
