Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2010
Publisher
Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
Language
en-US
Abstract
Although the Supreme Court of the United States has never developed a single clear test for determining what kinds of state action violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, schools that attempt to teach or introduce intelligent design as a purportedly scientific alternative to evolution likely fall afoul of the First Amendment's commands. Under the Court's most relevant precedent, Edwards v. Aguillard, teaching intelligent design violates the Establishment Clause because, among other things, there is an enormous disconnect between the purpose of teaching intelligent design and its effect. Moreover, public school teachers do not possess any First Amendment right of academic freedom to disregard the clear instructions of a school principal or district not to teach or introduce intelligent design in their classrooms.
Recommended Citation
Jay D. Wexler,
From the Classroom to the Courtroom: Intelligent Design and the Constitution
,
in
3
Evolution: Education and Outreach
215
(2010).
Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-010-0223-3
Comments
This article is a slightly revised and updated version of Jay D. Wexler, “From the Classroom to the Courtroom: Intelligent Design and the Constitution,” pp. 83–104 of Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design is Wrong for Our Schools, edited by Eugenie C. Scott and Glenn Branch (Boston: Beacon Press 2006).