Samiksha Jaiswal (Editor)

Bishop v. Aronov

Updated on
Edit
Like
Comment
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Decided
  
March 15, 1991

End date
  
March 15, 1991

Bishop v. Aronov

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

Citation(s)
  
926 F.2d 1066 (11th Cir. 1991)

Prior action(s)
  
District Court ruled in favor of Bishop

Judge(s) sitting
  
Emmett Ripley Cox, Stanley F. Birch, Jr. & Floyd R. Gibson

Ruling court
  
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Similar
  
Daniel v Waters, Selman v Cobb County S, Epperson v Arkansas, Edwards v Aguillard, Connick v Myers

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.

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

References

Bishop v. Aronov Wikipedia