Evolution 1 zillion, ID 0
The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.
To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.
The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.
So in summary, teaching Intelligent Design in a science classroom was found to be unconstitutional, ID was found to be untestable and grounded in religion, and IDiots were discovered to have lied on the stand to support their beliefs. I'm not kidding about the lying, there are already talks of perjury charges being levelled against some of the ID witnesses.
What a pity this can only be enforced in Pennsylvania. But Go Pennsylvania! anyway.
Oh, and there was a manifestation of his Great Noodliness in Baltimore, Mariland, an obvious foreshadowning sign of a rival being ousted by the courts. All Hail His Noodly Appendage, for ever and ever, ramen.