There certainly is. I saw the movie and distinctly saw Dr. Avalos admit to a bias at Iowa State. If he was not authorized to speak for ISU, then they have the opportunity to deny the connection, appropriately admonish Dr. Avalos and present a case that the campaign to cleanse the university of anything to do with ID was of no consequence in the decision to deny tenure to Dr. Gonzalez. Because there definitely was a campaign to rid ISU of any connection, real or imagined, to ID.
Yes, I've heard that too. It does not establish a link to this specific case. I'm sure Dr. Avalos has a bias against other pseudo-science as well. Another case in the movie concerns Robert Marks, an ID proponent who continues as a professor at his university despite the university's desire to not be associated with ID as science.
The ID movement picked the wrong poster boy in Gonzalez. They needed an exemplary scholar who deserved tenure, but was denied because of his ID beliefs. What they got was a guy who didn't deserve tenure by any normal criteria and pulled the ID persecution card when he didn't get it.
What do you want, ID affirmative action? ID has saddened me, as it has shown so many examples of conservatives acting like liberals.