Kitzmiller v. Dover brought up a global attention. The case rose in 2004, when the Dover Area District High School Board tried to add religion to a science class by masking it under scientific gear of adisclaimer promoting the “Intelligent Design”, and it was supposed to be a mandatory part of the school’s biology class curriculum. High School students’ parents sued the school to ban the Intelligent Design from biology curriculum. The trial took six weeks. Judge Jones made his decision by ruling out the Intelligent Design from being considered as science, and by stating that the Board’s disclaimer was violating the First Amendment and the PA Constitution. Judge Jones was a judge of facts; he was Christian and Republican, but it did not affect …show more content…
It mentioned that the evolution was a theory and was not a fact. Furthermore, gaps in the theory exist, and students must be made aware of the gaps in the science. ID suggested that everything was created by a designer, rather than was gone through evolution. Some parents and teachers favored ID to be taught along with biology; meanwhile others were against ID. Maybe not literally, but by its explanation adding ID to a biology curriculum meant teaching creationism along with scientific evolution. Eleven parents of Dover High School students filed a lawsuit against the school by challenging the constitutional validity of the Board’s policy. The plaintiffs argued that ID was a violation of part of the First Amendment, mainly the Establishment Clause, which mandates the separation of church and state. To be able to win, the plaintiffs ' lawyers were required to show the judge that the Dover School Board 's one minute statement promoted religion and creationism to be taught along the scientific Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. Even though the school denied the religious basis of the ID and mentioned that the students needed to learn another side of a theory that excludes evolution and promotes the designer who shaped the world and everything in it, it was obvious that ID could not be considered a science because