▁meant ▁that ▁a ▁conference ▁committee ▁had ▁to ▁decide ▁its ▁ult imate ▁fate . ▁ ▁Scient ists ▁and ▁educ ators ▁fe ared ▁that ▁by ▁sing ling ▁out ▁bi ological ▁evolution ▁as ▁very ▁controvers ial , ▁the ▁am end ment ▁could ▁create ▁the ▁impression ▁that ▁a ▁substantial ▁scientific ▁controvers y ▁about ▁evolution ▁exists , ▁leading ▁to ▁a ▁less ening ▁of ▁academic ▁rig or ▁in ▁science ▁curr ic ula . ▁A ▁coal ition ▁of ▁ 9 6 ▁scientific ▁and ▁educational ▁organizations ▁signed ▁a ▁letter ▁to ▁this ▁effect ▁to ▁the ▁conference ▁committee , ▁ur ging ▁that ▁the ▁am end ment ▁be ▁str icken ▁from ▁the ▁final ▁bill , ▁which ▁it ▁was , ▁but ▁intellig ent ▁design ▁supp or ters ▁on ▁the ▁conference ▁committee ▁preserved ▁it ▁in ▁the ▁bill ' s ▁legisl ative ▁history . ▁ ▁While ▁the ▁am end ment ▁did ▁not ▁become ▁law , ▁a ▁version ▁of ▁it ▁appears ▁in ▁the ▁Conference ▁Report ▁as ▁an ▁explan atory ▁text ▁about ▁the ▁legisl ative ▁history ▁and ▁purposes ▁of ▁the ▁bill . ▁However , ▁it ▁has ▁no ▁legal ▁force ▁per ▁se . ▁The ▁final ▁text ▁of ▁the ▁Sant orum ▁Am end ment ▁as ▁included ▁in ▁the ▁Conference ▁Report ▁reads : ▁ ▁Despite ▁the ▁am end ment ▁lack ing ▁the ▁weight ▁of ▁law , ▁the ▁conference ▁report ▁is ▁constantly ▁c ited ▁by ▁the ▁Disc overy ▁Institute ▁and ▁other ▁ID ▁supp or ters ▁as ▁providing ▁federal ▁san ction ▁for ▁intellig ent ▁design . ▁In ▁response ▁to ▁critic isms ▁of ▁the ▁Institute ▁stating ▁that ▁the ▁am end ment ▁was ▁a ▁federal ▁education