The student complained to college administrators that the answer was "offensive and unscientific," according to court documents filed this week.
In its lawsuit the Arizona-based ADF argues that Sheldon was properly providing students with information on the issue of nature versus nurture.
Ah... why am I ever surprised that a case is not as reported in the press? Further perusal of the plaintiff's side of the equation turns up a wee bit more
to the "student complaint" than a disagreement over the validity of Dörner's work. Several other statements were alleged to have been made, statements that I would readily agree were "offensive and unscientific." The plaintiff, however, denies having made them.
That particular tiff will, no doubt, be settled by evidence. It would be convenient if there were evidence.
The plaintiff's suit draws attention to a number of irregularities in this matter that really could amount to a violation of due process. That issue, too, will be settled by evidence.
It's an interesting case.