[shuckmaster]

The writer of this article seems to believe that a conservative supreme court is going to be an ignorant anti-science supreme court. I believe some ignorant anti-science people are going to be mighty disappointed if they think that will be the case. For one thing, all supreme court members and nominees have an education.</p>

[curiosity]

I believe Scalia joined an opinion in favor of the constitutionality of creation science. I'm not sure where Thomas stands, but I seem to remember him also being on the wrong side of such a decision.

You also should keep in mind that the constitutional question is far different from the policy question. Obviously, it's bad education policy to teach ID or psuedo-scientific criticisms of evolution. Whether it is unconstitutional to do so, however, is not as obvious. Nothing in the constitution mandates teaching of sound science.

I do agree with Scalia that the Lemon test is problematic. I am inclinded to think, however, that ID would violate the establishment clause even if a less strict test were applied. Nevertheless, it's not a straight forward question.