Judge to Intelligent design: get out and stay out!

In summary, the disclaimer singles out the theory of evolution for special treatment, misrepresents its status in the scientific community, causes students to doubt its validity without scientific justification, presents students with a religious alternative masquerading as a scientific theory, directs them to consult a creationist text as though it were a science resource, and instructs students to forego scientific inquiry in the public school classroom and instead to seek out religious instruction elsewhere.
Kitzmiller ruling (PDF)

The heart of the matter, really: it's obviously religion that's being taught here, and it says so on the label up front. Meanwhile, the Discovery Institute huffs and puffs:

Judge Jones found that the Dover board violated the Establishment Clause because it acted from religious motives. That should have been the end to the case...Instead, Judge Jones got on his soapbox to offer his own views of science, religion, and evolution. He makes it clear that he wants his place in history as the judge who issued a definitive decision about intelligent design. This is an activist judge who has delusions of grandeur.
--Dr. John West, Associate Director of the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute

In other words: uh, uhm, well, so they got us, but they should at least teach the controversy! Not so fast. The ruling makes a very clear case why it would also be inappropriate to teach the controversy in science class:

After this searching and careful review of ID as espoused by its proponents, as elaborated upon in submissions to the Court, and as scrutinized over a six week trial, we find that ID is not science and cannot be adjudged a valid, accepted scientific theory as it has failed to publish in peer-reviewed journals, engage in research and testing, and gain acceptance in the scientific community. ID, as noted, is grounded in theology, not science. Accepting for the sake of argument its proponents’, as well as Defendants’ argument that to introduce ID to students will encourage critical thinking, it still has utterly no place in a science curriculum.

Doh! It's not science, and hence even teaching the controversy is against the Establishment clause. Who'da thunk? But here's the ultimate in Discovery Institute spinmeister fun we've heard in a long time:

The plans of the lawyers on both sides of this case to turn this into a landmark ruling have been preempted by the voters.
--Discovery Institute attorney Casey Luskin

Ooooh, I see! So the voters actually didn't vote to get rid of board members who brought shame to their town. No, they have a cunning plan in mind: vote for pro-evolution board members soas not to make this into a landmark decision. Wait for this all to blow over. And then bring the other folks back in and have them institute mandatory after-school ID-awareness training for all students!