[Fester Chugabrew]

It is both a free exercise and an establishment case. Judge Jones acted as a government agent establishing and favoring only nontheistic principles in a public, academic setting. At the same time, he acted to prohibit the free exercise of those who, in the same setting, would like to present the reasonable view that organized matter may best be explained by the presence of an intelligent agent. According to the words of the Constitution federal judges do not have the prerogative of establishing nonthesistic principles on the one hand, and prohibiting the expression of theistic principles on the other, especially where public funding is concerned.

Now, if you want to start your own private school where only non-thesistic science is taught, and only non-theistic principles shape your theories, data, and the application of them, you are free to do so. But the minute you involve the tax money of those who espouse other shaping principles and theories, you forfeit the right for your own opinion and point of view to be presented.

[WildHorseCrash]

Well, you've shown that your legal analytical skills are on par with the vocabulary skills you displayed when you defined everything in life but actual prayer to be "atheistic."

[Virginia-American]

...At the same time, he [Judge Jones] acted to prohibit the free exercise of those who, in the same setting, would like to present the reasonable view that organized matter may best be explained by the presence of an intelligent agent...

Show me where the defendants said any such thing.