Selman v. Cobb County School District, No. 02-2325 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 13, 2005)
A federal district court in Georgia has ruled that a school district's application of stickers to science textbooks cautioning about the scientific validity of the theory of evolution violates the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court also ruled that the stickers violate the Georgia constitution. For years, Cobb County School District maintained a policy that the origins of life only be taught in elective courses and never as part of the required science curriculum. Although this policy did not expressly refer to evolution, it was implemented for the purpose of avoiding conflict with a large segment of the school district's residents whose religious beliefs are inconsistent with the theory of evolution. However, in 2001 the school board decided to strengthen evolution instruction and bring the district into compliance with statewide curriculum requirements. Part of this process involved adopting new science textbooks. When members of the community, identified as creationists, submitted a petition objecting to evolution being taught "as fact rather than theory," the idea of affixing stickers to the textbooks was born. School district legal counsel drafted this language for the sticker: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered." In the fall of 2002, the school district began affixing the stickers to all science textbooks that discussed the origins of life. A group of parents sued, alleging that the stickers violate the U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause. The district court addressed the Establishment Clause challenge by applying the three-pronged test enunciated in
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971). Under the
Lemon test, a government action passes First Amendment muster if: (1) it has a secular purpose; (2) its principal or primary effect is neither to advance nor to inhibit religion; and (3) it does not create excessive entanglement of government with religion. The court noted that the second and third prongs have merged into a single "effect" inquiry. Addressing the purpose prong, the district court found that the board's main purpose was to assuage members of the community who oppose the teaching of evolution based on their religious beliefs. Although this purpose is intertwined with religion, the court held that it is valid and secular, because the presentation of evolution was not unnecessarily hostile. Fostering critical thinking was also a valid secular purpose. Based on testimony by school board members, the court did not find that these purposes were merely a "sham" for promoting religion. Turning to the "effect" prong, the court noted that the disclaimer language must be analyzed to determine if it "conveys a message of endorsement or disapproval of religion to an informed reasonable observer." The court concluded that the sticker fails to satisfy the effect prong, because a "reasonable observer" would interpret it as sending a message to "those who oppose evolution for religious reasons that they are favored members of the political community" and "to those who believe in evolution that they are political outsiders." A reasonable observer would be aware of the heated debate and therefore would view the sticker as endorsing "the viewpoint of Christian fundamentalists and creationists that evolution is a problematic theory lacking an adequate foundation."
Selman v. Cobb County School District, No. 02-2325 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 13, 2005)
[Link to full opinion][
Editor's Note: In a 5-2 vote, the Cobb County School Board has decided to appeal the district court's ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. According to board member Curt Johnston, the board believes the district court erred in concluding that the stickers constitute an impermissible endorsement of religion. In a statement, the board indicated that the court's ruling "amounts to unnecessary judicial intrusion into local control of schools." See below.]
MSNBCBy Associated Press
[Link to full story]