Old familiar arguments, same result.
Talk Origins posted the opinion in Hendren v.
These decisions are important for historical reasons to demonstrate that ID makes the same previously rejected creationist decisions. The ID arguments in Kitzmiller are the same ones rejected by the Indiana court in 1977.
A short civics lesson follows on the importance of any particular court decision. Court decisions are of varying importance. As a general rule, the decision is strictly binding only on the involved parties. In some circumstances, the decision may have broader precedential value by setting out an established rule to be followed by future courts.
Determining the binding effect or "precedential value of a decision can be a little complicated in our federal system. A
The precedential value of a decision should not be confused with the decision’s persuasive authority. A persuasive decision involving a brilliant application of legal analysis to the facts can be written by any court and considered by any other court.
Hendren is a trial court decision, usually given little precedential value except by other