Supporters of yoga in Encinitas schools ‘surgically dismantle’ anti-yoga side

I missed this a bit, but last month, the supporters of the Encinitas yoga program uploaded their brief in the ongoing lawsuit. “Our arguments surgically dismantle plaintiffs’ theories and we look forward to having our victory affirmed,” they say. (The post is signed by the supporters’ pro bono lawyer, Dave Peck.)

Link to the brief is right here. Frankly, it hard to pick a particular excerpt. Here’s one:

As to Dr. Brown, the Sedlocks’ expert, as the trial court observed, her testimony rfi/as “the Petitioner’s whole case.” (CT
1100.) While the trial court found Dr. Brown’s testimony regarding yoga’s historically religious roots helpful, it also found Dr. Brown’s testimony that yoga exercises are inextricably religious and necessarily inculcate religion to be subjective and not credible. (CT 1099.) Where Dr. Brown saw religious rituals performed in the videos of actual students doing EUSD yoga, the trial court saw children engaged in physical education. (Ibíd.)

“Dr. Brown,” as the trial court determined, “sees religion everywhere in this.” (CT 1101.) The trial court found Dr. Brown’s testimony on this point to be extremely biased and motivated by her desire “to fuIfiII her personal goal of eliminating yoga from any school – any school, period.”

And here’s its conclusion:

Despite their reliance on Sands u. Morongo to show that EUSD must independently satisfy the California Constitution, the Sedlocks’ arguments under the California Constitution offer nothing new and rely on federal case law. As the trial court found, in contrast to Sands u. Morongo, EIJSD yoga is not prayer or ritual and is entirely devoid of any religious elements. It was not developed for any religious purposes; it does not endorse, promote, or aid any religion in any way; nor is it excessively entangled in any religion. EUSD yoga, therefore, satisfies all three prongs of the Lemon test, and there is simply no precedent for finding that a program that satisfies the federal Establishment Clause violates the California Constitution.

There you have it.

Posted by Steve


Published by


Two Ashtangis write about their practice and their teachers.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s