Surely, you jest ... I guess you haven't actually studied either, right?
If you look, which you clearly haven't, the Scopes trial was a discussion of the constitutionality of a Tennessee law. In truth, it actually wasn't about Scopes or evolution at all. That was merely a convenient vehicle to bring to a head a clash between Traditionalist and Moralists. Traditionalists, the older Victorians, worried that everything valuable was ending. Younger modernists no longer asked whether society would approve of their behavior, only whether their behavior met the approval of their intellect. Intellectual experimentation flourished. Americans danced to the sound of the Jazz Age, showed their contempt for alcoholic prohibition, debated abstract art and Freudian theories. In a response to the new social patterns set in motion by modernism, a wave of revivalism developed, becoming especially strong in the American South. It was an artificial issue created by the ACLU. Giving further lie to your interpretation is the fact that NO religious leader testified at the Scope trial for either side.
The Kitzmiller v Dover trial, on the other hand, was an overt attempt by the liberal intelligentsia to kill local control of school boards. In this case, Intelligent Design was merely the vehicle, not the issue. The Intelligent Design discussion is very much still in contention today. Again, it is of particular interest that no religious leader testified in this trial, either. The closest they came was to use a liberal Professor of Theology (a Roman Catholic) who testified FOR the plaintiffs. Conversely, professor of sociology at the University of Warwick in England, and author of books on social epistemology and science and technology studies testified for the defendants.
Nothing is as simple as it seems ... you need to be more careful.
