ILNews

Judge to discuss intelligent-design ruling

IL Staff
December 3, 2009
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The U.S. District judge who made the landmark ruling that the teaching of intelligent design in public schools is unconstitutional will speak at Indiana University Friday.

U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III, of the Middle District of Pennsylvania, will give a lecture about judicial independence and his intelligent-design ruling at 4 p.m. in Whittenberger Auditorium in the Indiana Memorial Union, 900 E. Seventh St., Bloomington.

Eleven parents sued after the Dover Area School District Board announced in 2004 that science teachers would be required to read a statement referring to "gaps" in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and referring students to read "Of Pandas and People" for an alternative view. That book used the term "intelligent design" to mean a specific field of inquiry.

Judge Jones decided in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District in December 2005 that the school board policy was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. He wrote that intelligent design was "nothing less than the progeny of creationism" and shouldn't be taught in public schools.

Judge Jones' lecture is a part of the university's College of Arts and Sciences' inaugural Themester, "Evolution, Diversity and Change." The lecture is free and open to the public.

Judge Jones was appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush and confirmed in 2002.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A traditional parade of attorneys? Really Evansville? Y'all need to get out more. When is the traditional parade of notaries? Nurses? Sanitation workers? Pole dancers? I gotta wonder, do throngs of admiring citizens gather to laud these marching servants of the constitution? "Show us your billing records!!!" Hoping some video gets posted. Ours is not a narcissistic profession by any chance, is it? Nah .....

  2. My previous comment not an aside at court. I agree with smith. Good call. Just thought posting here a bit on the if it bleeds it leads side. Most attorneys need to think of last lines of story above.

  3. Hello everyone I'm Gina and I'm here for the exact same thing you are. I have the wonderful joy of waking up every morning to my heart being pulled out and sheer terror of what DCS is going to Throw at me and my family today.Let me start from the !bebeginning.My daughter lost all rights to her 3beautiful children due to Severe mental issues she no longer lives in our state and has cut all ties.DCS led her to belive that once she done signed over her right the babies would be with their family. We have faught screamed begged and anything else we could possibly due I hired a lawyer five grand down the drain.You know all I want is my babies home.I've done everything they have even asked me to do.Now their saying I can't see my grandchildren cause I'M on a prescription for paipain.I have a very rare blood disease it causes cellulitis a form of blood poisoning to stay dormant in my tissues and nervous system it also causes a ,blood clotting disorder.even with the two blood thinners I'm on I still Continue to develop them them also.DCS knows about my illness and still they refuse to let me see my grandchildren. I Love and miss them so much Please can anyone help Us my grandchildren and I they should be worrying about what toy there going to play with but instead there worrying about if there ever coming home again.THANK YOU DCS FOR ALL YOU'VE DONE. ( And if anyone at all has any ideals or knows who can help. Please contact (765)960~5096.only serious callers

  4. He must be a Rethuglican, for if from the other side of the aisle such acts would be merely personal and thus not something that attaches to his professional life. AND ... gotta love this ... oh, and on top of talking dirty on the phone, he also, as an aside, guess we should mention, might be important, not sure, but .... "In addition to these allegations, Keaton was accused of failing to file an appeal after he collected advance payment from a client seeking to challenge a ruling that the client repay benefits because of unreported income." rimshot

  5. I am not a fan of some of the 8.4 discipline we have seen for private conduct-- but this was so egregious and abusive and had so many points of bad conduct relates to the law and the lawyer's status as a lawyer that it is clearly a proper and just disbarment. A truly despicable account of bad acts showing unfit character to practice law. I applaud the outcome.

ADVERTISEMENT