Did Kitzmiller decision help inspire "academic freedom" bills?

The National Center for Science Education reports that the seventh "anti-evolution" bill has been introduced in a state legislature in 2011, and that this bill is also the second such bill introduced in Tennessee (actually, it looks like it might be just a companion bill to a bill introduced in the other house of the legislature). The Darwinists seem to be surprised by these bills, but what I find surprising about these bills is that there are not more of them being introduced and not more of them being enacted into law -- after all, these bills merely reflect the majority opinion that both the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of evolution should be taught in the public schools. I cannot help but feel that these bills are partly a response to the censorious Kitzmiller v. Dover opinion, which says,

. . . we will enter an order permanently enjoining Defendants from maintaining the ID Policy in any school within the Dover Area School District, from requiring teachers to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution, and from requiring teachers to refer to a religious, alternative theory known as ID.

Though the above statement only prohibits requiring teachers to criticize evolution theory, the ruling must certainly also have the effect of deterring teachers from criticizing evolution theory on their own. These so-called "anti-evolution" or "academic freedom" bills are partly attempts to make "lawsuit-proof" laws that would counter such intimidation. Kitzmiller was a Pyrrhic victory that has really backfired on the Darwinists.

As I pointed out before, the Darwinists are victims of their own "Red Queen hypothesis" -- they must run hard just to stay in place.