House Bill 1228 (PDF), introduced in the Maryland House of Delegates on February 10, 2006, would, if enacted, require the state board of education to "prohibit the teaching or the discussion of the theory of intelligent design" in science classes and prohibit it from "requiring the teaching or discussion of the theory of intelligent design in any class." But there's a catch: HB 1228 would also require the board to "permit the teaching or discussion of the theory of intelligent design in humanities or philosophy classes" and moreover require it to develop and disseminate instructional materials for that purpose.
"While there is arguably a place for 'intelligent design' to be discussed in public school classrooms," commented NCSE executive director Eugenie C. Scott, "Marylanders would do well to be wary of the bill. Teaching 'intelligent design' as if it were scientifically credible is pedagogically inappropriate and constitutionally problematic, whether it's in a science class, a philosophy class, or a home ec class." Scott cited the recent case Hurst v. Newman, in which parents in Lebec, California, challenged the teaching of a four-week elective course on "Philosophy of Design."
In Lebec, a teacher sought to teach creationism as well as scientifically unwarranted criticisms of evolution under the rubric of philosophy. It was not until a lawsuit was actually filed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State that the school district conceded that the class was inappropriate, agreeing to end the class and never to offer it again. Scott, who provided an expert witness declaration (PDF) in Hurst v. Newman, warns that, if enacted, HB 1228 is likely to spawn cases like Lebec throughout Maryland.
The lead sponsor of HB 1228 is Delegate Emmett C. Burns Jr. (D-District 10), who subsequently introduced HB 1531. Based on antievolution legislation previously introduced in Alabama, HB 1531 aims to "expressly protect the right of teachers identified by the United States Supreme Court in Edwards v. Aguillard ... to present scientific critiques of prevailing scientific theories; and [to] expressly protect the right of students to hold a position on any views." Unlike HB 1228, HB 1531 explicitly characterizes "intelligent design" as a scientific view.