Bishop v. Aronov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Bishop v. Aronov
US-CourtOfAppeals-11thCircuit-Seal.png
Court United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Full case name Phillip A. Bishop v. Aaron M. Aronov, Winton M. Blount, O.H. Delchamps, Jr., Sandrall Hullett, Guy Hunt, William Henry Mitchell, John T. Oliver, Jr., Thomas E. Rast, Yetta G. Samford, Jr., Martha H. Simms, Wayne Teague, Cleophus Thomas, Jr., George S. Shirley, Cordell Wynn, all in their official capacities as members of the Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama
Decided March 15, 1991
Citation(s) 926 F.2d 1066 (11th Cir. 1991)
Case history
Prior action(s) District Court ruled in favor of Bishop
Case opinions
Floyd R. Gibson
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Emmett Ripley Cox, Stanley F. Birch, Jr. & Floyd R. Gibson

Bishop v. Aronov, 926 F.2d 1066 (11th Cir. 1991), was a 1991 legal case in which Phillip A. Bishop, an exercise physiology professor at the University of Alabama, sued the college on free speech and academic freedom grounds, when it instructed him not to teach "intelligent design theory" in an extracurricular class and not to lecture on "evidences of God in Human Physiology" in class. The District Court for the Northern District of Alabama found in favor of Bishop but the university appealed and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit found that the classroom, during instructional time, was not an open forum, and that the university had a right to set the curriculum.[1][2]

A similar case was Edwards v. California University of Pennsylvania.

References[edit]

  1. ^ The Law of Higher Education, William A. Kaplin, Barbara A. Lee, pp 262-263
  2. ^ Creationism, Ideology, and Science, Eugenie C. Scott, New York Academy of Sciences. Published as The Flight From Reason. Volume 775 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. June 24, 1996.