The Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of South Carolina, et al. v. The Episcopal Church, et al.

This Court has held that courts may resolve church property disputes between religious organizations by applying “neutral principles of law, developed for use in all property disputes.” Presbyterian Church in the United States v. Mary Elizabeth Blue Hull Mem’l Presbyterian Church, 393 U.S. 440, 449 (1969). The Court has further held that the neutral-principles approach embodied in the First Amendment “relies exclusively on objective, well-established concepts of trust and property law familiar to lawyers and judges.” Jones v. Wolf, 443 U.S. 595, 603 (1979). The high courts of seven States, plus the Eighth Circuit, faithfully follow the neutral-principles approach, resolving church property disputes by applying the same ordinary, well-established rules of state trust and property law that apply in all other property disputes. These jurisdictions recognize a trust in favor of a national church over the local church only if the alleged trust satisfies the requirements under state law for forming a trust. But the high courts of eight other States, including the Supreme Court of South Carolina in this case, believe that the neutral-principles approach and the First Amendment require them to recognize a trust in favor of a national church even if the alleged trust does not satisfy the rules for forming a trust that state law would require in any other context. The question presented is: Whether the “neutral principles of law” approach to resolving church property disputes requires courts to recognize a trust on church property even if the alleged trust does not comply with the State’s ordinary trust and property law.