Luskin: "Does Challenging Darwin Create Constitutional Jeopardy? A Comprehensive Survey Of Case Law Regarding The Teaching Of Biological Origins"

The article appears in the legal journal Hamline University Law Review, Vol. 32(1):1-64 (Winter, 2009), published by Hamline University School of Law. The article essentially points out that "few have bothered to engage in a careful review of the case law to determine if evolution actually is beyond scrutiny in public schools. This article attempts to exhaustively survey the case law relevant to the teaching of biological origins, dividing the cases into three major categories: (1) Cases upholding the right to teach about evolution; (2) Cases rejecting the teaching of alternatives to evolution; and (3) Cases rejecting disclaimers regarding the teaching of evolution. The range of constitutionally permissible policies for teaching evolution can also be understood by studying policies that have not engendered lawsuits. Twenty-one cases are reviewed, as well as various policies that have not faced legal challenges, revealing that while courts have firmly upheld the rights of educators to teach evolution and have rejected attempts to teach creationism, none of these cases stands for the proposition that a curriculum that teaches scientific critiques of evolution would necessarily place a school board in constitutional jeopardy."

To read the article visit http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=5151.
Tweet