I don't know if this judge has what it takes to grasp what a charlatan Behe truly is. But it's not important. Even if the judge is bamboozled enough to think there's actually some hints of science in Behe's babbling, he can still easily find that presenting ID in school violates the First Amendment. Don't forget, it's all about applying the Lemon test.
To fly under the First Amendment radar, the defendant school board must show that its ID statement passes the three-pronged Lemon test:
First, the statute [or any state action] must have a secular legislative purpose;They've got plenty of evidence from statements made by school board members about item one. I don't think there's much doubt about item two. Or item three. But showing that the ID declaration violates any of the three prongs of the Lemon test is enough for the plaintiffs to prevail. Then it will be up to the Supreme Court to follow or reject Lemon.second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion,
finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."
The Lemon test was the darling of the ACLU and is applauded by all constitutional revisionists, just as Roe is applauded (another inventive product of leftist judicial activism) ever since Harry Blackmun created it out of whole cloth.
The present politicized court and the Lemon test are the results of a judicial crapshoot that favors the left and its 'evolving' Constitution mythology.
It would be a significant secular purpose if it was to encourage scientists to dig for better recognition of the nature of the Intelligence -- which for all a secularist knows could be a natural phenomenon into which science currently has no insight.