This case is getting a fair amount of media attention now, and I plan to follow it. Below are some interesting documents and links.
The court’s denial of summary judgment. This contains the judge’s initial opinion on what is at issue. This contains ample language showing his inclination to accept Coppedge’s version of events: “A trier of fact would be entitled to disbelieve Defendant’s stated reasons for the adverse employment actions.”
While the case has attracted interest because of the controversial nature of intelligent design, it is at its heart a straightforward discrimination case, said Eugene Volokh, a professor of First Amendment law at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law.
“The question is whether the plaintiff was fired simply because he was wasting people’s time and bothering them in ways that would have led him to being fired regardless of whether it was about religion or whether he was treated worse based on the religiosity of his beliefs,” said Volokh. “If he can show that, then he’s got a good case.”