A panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the case of high school history teacher James Corbett, who was found to have violated a student's religious freedom rights by offering derogatory opinions about religion in class. At issue in the appeal is whether Corbett is entitled to the "qualified immunity" that the lower court ruled agreed insulated him from having to pay damages and attorney's fees.
The 9th Circuit is also considering whether the trial judge was correct in determining the constitutionality of various challenged statements. Via Religion Clause – where you can also find a link to the oral argument recording – the OC Journal reports:
The three judges on Friday also scrutinized the merits of the trial court's ruling itself. U.S. District Court Judge James Selna ruled in May 2009 that while Corbett's Creationism comment (referring to Creationism as "superstitious nonsense") violated the law, more than 20 other tape-recorded classroom comments cited by Farnan's attorneys passed legal muster.
The judges returned to a handful of these statements, including: "When you pray for divine intervention, you're hoping that the spaghetti monster will help you get what you want."
Corbett's attorney, Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Irvine's law school, told the judges that all of the statements had been taken out of context, and that all had legitimate teaching purposes that did not promote hostility toward religion.
