Intelligent Design as promoted by the Discovery Institute is considered a form of creationism by major scientific organisations worldwide. This is a source of contention for the Discovery Institute, as creationism is blocked from public school science classes by the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution and therefore this prevents the Wedge Strategy from achieving its larger goals. According to Judge John Jones (2005 trial of Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al):
"ID is the progeny of creationism
The evidence at trial demonstrates that intelligent design is nothing less than the progeny of creationism. What is likely the strongest evidence supporting the finding of intelligent design's creationist nature is the history and historical pedigree of the book to which students in Dover's ninth-grade biology class are referred, Of Pandas and People. Pandas is published by an organization called FTE, as noted, whose articles of incorporation and filings with the Internal Revenue Service describe it as a religious, Christian organization. Pandas was written by Dean Kenyon and Percival Davis, both acknowledged creationists, and Nancy Pearcey, a Young Earth Creationist, contributed to the work."
For more information, view the courtroom evidence here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-tk7MkHKtI
In the following section taken from the Dover trial court transcript, Q indicates Eric Rothschild and A indicates Jon A. Buell. The book is Of Pandas and People, the supplemental textbook published by FTE.
Q Actually in this version of the book it describes who creationists are, doesnt it, if you look at pages 22 and 23 and 24. It says theres different types of creationists literature. There are older [old earth] creationists, younger [young earth] creationists, agnostic creationists, right?
A Yes. We were trying to give some articulation to the breadth of what that term means.
Q And then if you could turn back to page 22, you explain that Creation is the theory that various forms of life began abruptly, with their distinctive features already intact: Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers and wings, mammals with fur and mammary glands. Thats how you defined creation, correct?
A Yes.
Q All right. And I would like to take you to take a look at an excerpt from Pandas and People. Turn to page 99 in the excerpt I gave you.
A All right.
Q Says, Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact: Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks and wings, et cetera.
Do you see that?
A I see it.
Q So thats pretty much the exact same sentence substituting creation for intelligent design, isnt that right?
A The reason that you find the similarity in the two passages is because this obviously was at a time when we were developing the manuscript. We had not chosen the term intelligent design at that point. We were trying to this was just a place holder term until we came to grips with which of the plausible two or three terms that are in scientific literature we would settle on. And that was the last thing we did before the book was revise I mean was sent to the publisher.
Q It was creation, creation, creation until the end and then it was intelligent design.
(Court transcript, pp.97-99)
The above-mentioned textbook, "Of Pandas and People", started life as a "creation science" textbook, but was republished following creation science's failure to enter high school science curricula in the 1980s. The new editions of the book substitute the term "intelligent design" for "creationism" and so on, but do not change the arguments. The two terms are therefore clearly synonymous as far as the authors (who include prominent Discovery Institute fellows) are concerned.
"Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." -Phillip E. Johnson, Father of "Intelligent Design"
It should be noted that many other creationists object to intelligent design's categorisation as creationism, requiring that true creationism state the identity of the designer explicitly, or take a stance on the age of the planet Earth, or for other reasons.