You are here
A lawsuit challenging the Understanding Evolution website on constitutional grounds was dismissed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on March 13, 2006. Understanding Evolution, a collaborative project of the University of California Museum of Paleontology and the National Center for Science Education, was originally intended as a resource for teachers; it subsequently expanded to appeal to everyone interested in learning about evolution.
The lawsuit in Hurst et al. v. Newman et al. -- in which eleven parents challenged the constitutionality of a four-week intersession course on "The Philosophy of Design" (formerly "The Philosophy of Intelligent Design") at Frazier Mountain High School in Lebec, California -- was settled on January 17, 2006.
Eleven parents have brought suit against the El Tejon School District in Lebec, California to stop it from teaching a course which promotes creationism. Attorneys from Americans United for Separation and State (AU) and the law firm Arnold and Porter are representing the plaintiffs.
AU's press release announcing the suit notes that, " On Jan. 1, the board of trustees of El Tejon Unified School District approved an elective called 'Philosophy of Design' that advocates 'intelligent design' and other concepts of creationism."
As a lawsuit against the University of California system wends its way through the legal system -- with a hearing on a motion to dismiss the complaint to be heard in federal court in Los Angeles on December 12, 2005 -- the media is taking notice of it again. The suit charges the University of California system with violating the constitutional rights of applicants from Christian schools whose high school coursework is deemed inadequate preparation for college.
Speaking at the Los Angeles Natural History Museum on September 28, 2005, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell declared that "intelligent design" was unwelcome in California's public school science classes. "The introduction of intelligent design theory in natural science courses would be a blow to the integrity of education in California," O'Connell said. "Our state has been recognized across the country and around the world for the quality and rigor of our academic standards.
Creationism is prominent in a recent lawsuit that charges the University of California system with violating the constitutional rights of applicants from Christian schools whose high school coursework is deemed inadequate preparation for college. The complaint was filed in federal court in Los Angeles on August 25, 2005, on behalf of the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI), the Calvary Chapel Christian School in Murrieta, California, and a handful of students at the school. Representing the plaintiffs are Robert H.
In the spring 2005 issue of California Wild, the magazine of the California Academy of Sciences, NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott, a Fellow of the Academy, discussed creationism in California, in a piece entitled "In My Backyard." A section of the article briefly described controversies over evolution education in the Roseville, California, schools over the last few years.
The spring 2005 issue of California Wild features "In my backyard: Creationists in California," by NCSE executive director Eugenie C. Scott. Beginning by alluding to the evolution warning labels in Cobb County, Georgia, she comments, "Many Californians chalked up this example of the persistent creationism/evolution controversy to the fact that it happened in, well, Georgia.
Science teachers in the Roseville Joint Union High School District have told the district that they do not want to add antievolutionist materials to the district science curriculum, according to the Sacramento Bee (December 28, 2003). The materials, recommended by Larry Caldwell, a local parent, and Cornelius Hunter, author of Darwin’s God and Darwin’s Proof, included the videotape of Icons of Evolution.