NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. \u201d\u201c May 5, 2009 \u201d\u201c St. James Anglican Church, at the centerpiece of a nationally publicized church property dispute with the Episcopal Church, announced today that it will file a petition for writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court to resolve an important issue of religious freedom: Does the United States Constitution, which both prohibits the establishment of religion and protects the free exercise of religion, allow certain religious denominations to disregard the normal rules of property ownership that apply to everyone else?
Under longstanding law, no one can unilaterally impose a trust over someone else\u2019s property without their permission. Yet, in the St. James case before the California Supreme Court, named Episcopal Church Cases, the Court created a special perquisite for certain churches claiming to be \u201chierarchical,\u201d\u009d with a \u201csuperior religious body,\u201d\u009d which may allow them to unilaterally appropriate for themselves property purchased and maintained by spiritually affiliated but separately
\nincorporated local churches. St. James will argue before the U.S.Supreme Court that this preferential treatment for certain kinds of religion violates the U.S. Constitution.<\/p>\n
The constitutional issues St. James will raise before the U.S. Supreme Court go far beyond St. James or even the Episcopal Church. Every local church, temple, synagogue, parish, spiritual center, congregation or religious group which owns its property, and has some affiliation with a larger religious group, is possibly at risk of losing its property upon a change of religious affiliation. As a result, religious freedom is suppressed, as those who have sacrificed to build their local religious communities are now at risk of having their properties taken based on some past, current or future spiritual affiliation. A United States Supreme Court decision in favor of St.James would benefit local churches and religious groups throughout the country because it would allow congregations the ability to freely exercise their religion without having to forfeit their property to a larger religious body or denomination with which they are affiliated in the event of a dispute over religious doctrine.<\/p>\n
While petitions for review with the U.S. Supreme Court are never assured, there are compelling arguments for the Justices to grant this petition, including:<\/p>\n
\u00c2\u00b7 Dozens of church property cases are percolating in the court
\nsystem, lacking clear constitutional direction.<\/p>\n
\u00c2\u00b7 States are in conflict regarding the handling of church property cases.<\/p>\n
\u00c2\u00b7 These issues have garnered widespread national attention and
\ninvolve important questions of federal constitutional law.<\/p>\n
The people of St. James Church have owned and sacrificed to build their church property for many decades, and during that time they have never agreed to relinquish their property to the Episcopal Church upon a change of religious affiliation. St. James has consistently maintained that it has the right to use and possess its own property.<\/p>\n
John Eastman, a nationally recognized constitutional law scholar, has
\njoined the legal team to pursue the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
\nA response from the Court regarding the St. James petition can be
\nexpected as early as October 2009. A decision could be reached as
\nearly as mid-2010.<\/p>\n
Even as St. James prepares for a bid on the Supreme Court calendar,
\nthe church\u2019s legal battle has returned to the Orange County Superior
\nCourt. \u201cWhile we are surprised that the California Supreme Court
\nwould prefer certain religions over others when it comes to property
\nownership, the battle in this case is far from over,\u201d\u009d said Eric C.
\nSohlgren, lead attorney and spokesperson for St. James. \u201cThe case has
\nalready returned to the Orange County Superior Court. Because St.
\nJames had an early victory in 2005 by legally attacking the Episcopal
\nallegations, we now look forward to presenting evidence and additional
\nlegal arguments on behalf of St. James. For example, St. James has
\nbrought a complaint against the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles based
\non a 1991 written promise that it would not claim a trust over the
\nproperty of St. James on 32nd Street in Newport Beach.\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n
For more information, please visit the website: www.steadfastinfaith.org<\/p>\n
=====================================================================<\/p>\n
A Brief Recap: St. James Anglican Church\u2019s Fight to Keep its Property<\/p>\n
In August 2004 St. James Church ended its affiliation with the
\nEpiscopal Diocese of Los Angeles and the Episcopal Church over
\ntheological differences involving the authority of Holy Scripture and
\nthe Lordship of Jesus Christ. The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles
\nbrought lawsuits against St. James Church, All Saints Church, Long
\nBeach, CA, and St. David\u2019s Church, No. Hollywood, CA, and their
\nvolunteer board members in September of 2004. Subsequently, the
\nnational Episcopal Church intervened into the lawsuits against the
\nthree local church corporations and their volunteer board members.<\/p>\n
In August 2005 the Honorable David C. Velasquez of the Orange County
\nSuperior Court ruled in favor of St. James Church and struck the
\ncomplaint brought by the Diocese of Los Angeles. In October 2005
\nJudge Velasquez issued a similar ruling in favor of All Saints and St.
\nDavid\u2019s Churches. These early victories arose from early challenges
\nto the two complaints filed by the Diocese and the Episcopal Church,
\nand as a result, no trial ever occurred. The Episcopalians then
\nappealed to the California Court of Appeal sitting in Orange County on
\nthis very limited court record, arguing that under neutral principles
\nof law they had a probability of prevailing and had alleged legally
\nviable claims.<\/p>\n
In July 2007 the Court of Appeal rejected nearly thirty years of
\nCalifornia church property law by ruling that a secular court must
\ndefer to the determinations of the highest level of the church
\nhierarchy regarding ownership of local church property, regardless of
\nany agreements between the parties, the corporate documents, who paid
\nfor the property, or who held the deed. The Court of Appeal reversed
\nthe trial court judgment in favor of St. James, and ordered the case
\nback to the trial court.<\/p>\n
In August 2007 St. James filed a petition with the California Supreme
\nCourt, which the Court unanimously and quickly accepted under the name
\nof Episcopal Church Cases. The Court heard oral argument in the case
\nin October 2008.<\/p>\n
In January 2009 the California Supreme Court ruled in Episcopal Church
\nCases that church property disputes in California must be resolved by
\nneutral or non-religious principles of law, not by civil courts merely
\ndeferring to the decrees of church \u201chierarchies\u201d\u009d or larger church
\nbodies. As a result, every church property dispute in California now
\nwill be resolved based on non-religious factors that are unique to the
\ndispute. While adopting this non-religious method of resolving
\nproperty disputes between churches, however, the Court seemed to defer
\nto the Episcopal Church\u2019s alleged \u201ctrust canon,\u201d\u009d which purports to
\ncreate a trust interest in church property owned by local
\ncongregations. The Court made its ruling despite the fact that St.
\nJames purchased and maintained its property with its own funds and has
\nheld clear record title to its property for over fifty years. St.
\nJames believes that this ruling overlooked decades of trust law in
\nCalifornia that only allows the owner of property to create a trust in
\nfavor of someone else, and will as a result have wide impact for local
\nchurch property owners throughout California that seek to change their
\nreligious affiliation.<\/p>\n
In late January 2009 St. James formally asked the California Supreme
\nCourt to modify its January decision.<\/p>\n
In February 2009 the California Supreme Court granted the St. James
\nrequest, and modified its decision to confirm both that the suit
\nagainst St. James is not over and that no decision on the merits of
\nthe case has yet been made. Instead, the Court clarified that its
\ndecision was only based on the limited record before it, which will
\nnow be augmented through the normal discovery and trial process.<\/p>\n
In late February 2009, the case against St. James Church corporation, the volunteer board members, and clergy returned to the trial court in Orange County where St. James can assert factual and legal arguments that were not addressed on appeal through discovery, depositions, motions, and trial. Using the legal standard set forth by the California Supreme Court, the Orange County Superior Court will eventually decide the merits of this dispute. For example, St. James has brought a complaint against the Diocese of Los Angeles based on a 1991 written promise that it would not claim a trust over the property of St. James on 32nd Street in Newport Beach.<\/p>\n
In May 2009, St. James will plan to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. A response from the Court regarding its decision to hear St. James\u2019s petition can be expected by October 2009. The Justices could render by mid-2010.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. \u201d\u201c May 5, 2009 \u201d\u201c St. James Anglican Church, at the centerpiece of a nationally publicized church property dispute with the Episcopal Church, announced today that it will file a petition for writ of certiorari with the…<\/span><\/p>\n