A federal appeals court has affirmed a lower court’s decision to dismiss a case brought in Kansas by a religiously-minded group of parents and students. The plaintiffs were concerned about their home state’s adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).

As Ars reported back in 2013 when the case was first filed, the NGSS standards are a nationwide attempt to improve science education in the US. They have been backed by organizations such as the National Research Council, National Science Teachers Association, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

This case, COPE v. Kansas Board of Education, is a notable victory for science—and a blow to the creationist crowd and its progeny.

The Citizens for Objective Public Education (COPE) has lead the charge against the NGSS in Kansas, and claims that these new standards are actually a form of religious indoctrination. (The NGSS have been adopted by 18 states, including Kansas.) How could COPE come to that conclusion? Because, it argues, the NGSS do not include any religious explanation for the origins of life and the universe. Therefore, according to the group, the NGSS in Kansas violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution, which forbids the government's ability to "establish" a state-sanctioned religion.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver found that COPE lacked standing—the group could not show that it had suffered actual harm.

“COPE does not offer any facts to support the conclusion that the Standards condemn any religion or send a message of endorsement,” the court concluded in its April 19 ruling. “And any fear of biased instruction is premised on COPE’s predictions of school districts’ responses to the Standards—an attempt by COPE to recast a future injury as a present one.”

In a footnote, the 10th Circuit also noted that while it did not consider one of COPE’s primary remedies—that teleological (goal-oriented) origin theories be taught alongside mainstream evolutionary science—the court would have found the remedy unconstitutional under a 1987 Supreme Court decision. That case, Edwards v. Aguillard, invalidated the requirement to teach creationism alongside evidence-based evolutionary science.