Some people consider Darwin bad science. But the judge will decide for us all.
Actually not. The judge has neither the expertise nor the legal mandate to make such a decision.
He must, however, make a determination as to whether the instruction on ID violates the First Amendment. That may (but need not) require him to examine whether ID is bad science, good science or science at all. But nothing in the issue presented to the court would require him to determine whether "Darwin" is bad science. So even if he were to discuss the matter (which I think is doubtful), it would be dictum, and legally worthless.