Over in Roseville (Roseville裁判終了）
The defendants in Caldwell v. Roseville Joint Union High School District et alia won a victory in court on September 7, 2007, when Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. granted their motion for a summary judgment against the plaintiff, Larry Caldwell. In 2003 and 2004, Caldwell, a lawyer and parent in the Sacramento suburb of Roseville, California, sought to persuade the RJUHSD Board of Trustees to adopt his "Quality Science Education" Policy, which would have called for teaching "the scientific strengths and weaknesses" of evolution. In 2005, after his proposals were rejected, he filed a lengthy complaint in federal court against the district, a number of its employees, and two members of the board of education, alleging that his civil rights were violated during the controversy. Caldwell told the Sacramento Bee (January 16, 2005), "You ought to be able to bring a proposal without being treated differently because they don't like what you're saying, or they don't like your religious beliefs." But school board president Jim Joiner, a named defendant in the case, told the Bee that Caldwell received plenty of attention from the board and the districts, noting that his proposal was discussed at eight separate meetings. Caldwell's suit was publicized by the Discovery Institute, which issued a press release on his behalf and subsequently added him as a guest blogger to its blog, and also by a number of media sources on the religious right.
"Caldwell対 Roseville Joint Union高校学区ほか"裁判は、2007年9月7日にFrank C. Damrell Jr.裁判官が原告Larry Caldwellの訴えを棄却したことで、学区側の勝利となった。カリフォルニア州Sacramento郊外Rosevilleの弁護士で親であるCaldwellは、2003年と2004年に、「進化論の科学的長所と短所」を教えることを求める"クオリティ理科教育"というCaldwellの教育指針を採択するようにRoseville Joint Union高校学区ほかに求めた。2005年にCaldwellの提案が拒否されると、Caldwellは、学区と学区勤務2名と学区教育委員2名を、この論争で自分の市民権が侵害されたとして、連邦裁判所に長々しい抗議を提出した。Caldwellは、2005年1月16日付のSacrament Bee紙で、「言っている内容や宗教心情が嫌いであっても、提案は同等に扱われるべきだ」と述べた。これに対して、の裁判の被告であるJim Joiner教育委員長は、Sacrament Bee紙に対して、Caldwellは教育委員会及び学区から、8つの別々の会議でCaldwellの提案は議論されたと通知されていると述べた。Caldwell裁判について、Discovery Instituteはプレスリリースを出し、Caldwellをゲストブロガに加えて宣伝した。同様にReligious rightのメディアが宣伝した。
In his decision (PDF), Judge Damrell emphasized, "this case is not about how biology, including discussions of evolutionary theory can or should be taught in public schools. ... Rather, this case is about whether Larry Caldwell was denied access to speak in various fora or participate in certain processes because of his actual or perceived religious beliefs." Although Caldwell alleged that he was denied such access, in violation of his rights to free speech, due process, and equal production and of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, Judge Damrell found otherwise: "the court has found that plaintiff has failed to proffer evidence sufficient to demonstrate a triable issue of fact as to any of his constitutional claims based upon this alleged discrimination" is a typical remark from the decision. ...
判決で、Damrell判事は「この裁判は、進化論についての論争を含む生物学が公立学校で教えることができるか、あるいは教えるべきかについてではない。この裁判は、Larry Caldwellが実際に何を信じているか、あるいは表明された宗教信条を理由に、定められたプロセスに参加することや、フォーラムで発言することを拒否されたかどうかについてである」と述べた。Caldwellは、言論の自由と手続きと政教分離を定めた憲法修正第１条についての権利を侵害されたと主張した。しかし、Damrell判事はこの主張を却下した。「法廷は、いずれの憲法上の権利侵害についても、原告は公判に付すべき事実の争点を示すに十分な証拠を提示できなかったと判断した」...
Updated September 13, 2007. September 11, 2007
[Over in Roseville (2007/09/11) on National Center for Science Education]
タグ：創造論