CTA's 2nd Brief & Response to Plaintiff's 1st Brief - National Center ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 14 of 80 ID: 7418245 DktEntry: 45-1 not leave [Peloza] alone to propagandize kids with this religious, superstitious nonsense." The District Court saw this comment as hostile to religion in purpose and effect, construing the "nonsense" to be Peloza's belief in creationism, but the context shows that the "nonsense" was not Peloza's belief, but Peloza's improper actions. In addition, this personal story was part of an informal class discussion where Dr. Corbett's comments would have been understood as his own, and not his employer's. No Establishment Clause violation occurred. (I) ISSUES PRESENTED Whether Dr. Corbett violated the Establishment Clause by making certain statements in a high school AP European History class that addressed religion's role in particular historical events, as part of a secular education program designed to teach critical thinking skills, independent thought, deductive reasoning, and the ability to analyze and understand historical events; and whether Dr. Corbett violated the Establishment Clause by reporting to students during a casual classroom discussion a comment he had made years earlier about another teacher who had been promoting young-earth creationism in a Biology classroom. (2) Whether Dr. Corbett violated the Establishment Clause by making statements, and engendering discussion, about social and political issues, when those statements contained no reference to religion.
(3) Whether the District Court abused its discretion in pemitting Dr. Corbett and the School District to amend their answer to include a qualified immunity defense - a defense for which Plaintiffs were already on notice because Union Intervenors had already asserted the defense in their answer. (4) Whether Dr. Corbett is entitled to qualified immunity when no prior court case had addressed whether one comment (or even a number of comments) about creation science, made during a year-long course by a teacher recounting a prior event in response to a student question, could violate the Establishment Clause, and when case law recognizes that teachers are permitted to present information that might be deemed distasteful to some religious adherents as part of an overall secular education program. (5) Whether Farnan's request for declaratory relief is moot, particularly now that he has graduated from high school. (6) Whether the District Court abused its discretion in denying Plaintiffs request for declaratory relief, even assuming that a request for declaratory relief is not moot. Ill //I Ill Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 15 of 80 ID: 7418245 DktEntry: 45-1
Page 1 and 2: Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 1 o
Page 11 and 12: Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 11
Page 13: encourages students to test their i
Page 21 and 22: Dr. Corbett also encourages student
Page 25 and 26: Id at 521. Case: 09-56689 07/26/201
Page 33 and 34: to pass muster. Edwards v. Aguillar
Page 37 and 38: The District Court correctly determ
Page 41 and 42: attendance correlations by omitting
Page 61 and 62: explanation of delay and acted prom
Page 65 and 66:
Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 65
Page 67 and 68:
Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 67
Page 69 and 70:
Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 69
Page 71 and 72:
Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 71
Page 73 and 74:
Judicial treatment of qualified imm
Page 75 and 76:
Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 75
Page 77 and 78:
Case: 09-56689 07/26/2010 Page: 77
Page 79 and 80:
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I certify
show all

CTA's 2nd Brief & Response to Plaintiff's 1st Brief - National Center ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?