"Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves.
With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the Origins of Life to individual students and their families. As a Standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on Standards-based assessments."
No curriculum involving ID. The statement makes it clear that ID/origin of life issues are a family issue.
That is the fact of the matter. Federal involvement is not warranted even before the discussion of whether ID is science or creationism, statism not withstanding. Once the Judge ignored that and set himself up as the peer review board rather than a constitutional scholar he became an activist despite his protests to the contrary.
Very convincing if you are preaching to the choir. when the school authorities make claims about scientific theories that scientists do not share, in science textbooks, the claim that this is not part of the science curriculum is, well, coy. If you wish to make this claim in the cafeteria, in an informal discussion, maybe it's not a constitutional question. If you choose to insist on labeling science textbooks with claims that support your religious beliefs, and the judge uncovers the fact that your motivations are, in fact, religious, and your claims do not have the level of scientific respectability of dozens of other pseudo-science claims no one in their right mind would dream of putting as a label on a textbook, there is nothing, that makes sense to me, to shield you from the critical eye of the keepers of the Constitution.