Voters Oust Dover School Board
althouse at wisc.edu
Wed Nov 9 06:48:07 PST 2005
I'd say the voluntary cessation doctrine would cover anything that
might appear moot here.
On Nov 9, 2005, at 7:56 AM, James Maule wrote:
> According to an article in this morning's Philadelphia Inquirer
> [http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/local/13116793.htm (a free
> subscription site)], voters in Dover, Pa., where the intelligent
> curriculum trial recently concluded, replaced all 8 Republican school
> board members who were up for re-election with Democrats who
> on removing intelligent design from the curriculum. This, note, in a
> heavily Republican area. (There is a ninth board member whose term did
> not end.)
> When I saw this my first thought was, ok, the new school board (which
> is sworn in on Dec 5) changes the curriculum, and this would seem to
> moot the case. Would it be dismissed by agreement? By the judge? Could
> it be dismissed? Should it be dismissed?
> But further reading revealed that the group "sponsoring" the slate of
> Democrats had promised that if they claimed a majority of the school
> board, they would not rush to change the curriculum. He stated, "The
> guiding force for this group is going to be Judge Jones' decision." So
> there goes dismissal by agreement, and I guess there goes dismissal
> because the issue is mooted. Unless the judge calls the parties in for
> an in-chambers post-trial settlement attempt?
> One of the ousted school board members claims the vote was not so much
> a vote against intelligent design being taught as a vote against
> spending money to litigate the case.
> At the end of the article, the writer notes that the Kansas Board of
> Education "yesterday approved science standards for public schools
> cast doubt on the theory of evolution."
> Jim Maule
> Villanova Univesrity School of Law
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed
> as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages
> that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members
> can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
More information about the Religionlaw