The university in 2019 declared itself “effectively independent” from the church, prompting a lawsuit.
DALLAS — The Texas Supreme Court Wednesday heard a case that could determine whether or not SMU can sever ties with the United Methodist Church.
The case stems from a lawsuit the United Methodist Church’s South Central Jurisdictional Conference, which runs the church’s congregations in eight states including Texas, filed against SMU 2019 over control over the university.
The lawsuit revolves around SMU’s decision to effectively declare itself independent from the denomination’s regional governing body. The university’s board of trustees voted in November of 2019 to update its governing documents “to make clear that SMU is solely maintained and controlled by its board as the ultimate authority for the University.”
SMU’s change to its governing documents came amid a split within the United Methodist Church over issues of the ordination of LGBTQ clergy and same-sex marriages within the church. The United Methodist Church voted in February 2019 to endorse the so-called “Traditional Plan,” which strengthened the church’s bans on ordaining LGBTQ clergy and hosting same-sex marriage.
The United Methodist Church’s South Central Jurisdictional Conference then sued SMU, arguing it has jurisdiction over the university and that the university needed its approval to make the changes to its governing language. The conference claimed in the lawsuit that it has control over SMU because it founded SMU in 1911 with an initial gift of 133 acres of land and documents stated any amendments had to be approved by the church.
The case made its way to the Texas Supreme Court on Tuesday when justices heard oral arguments.
“If any rule of corporate law is firmly established, it’s that third parties can’t bring vexatious litigation second guessing board of trustees exercise of their sound business judgment,” said Allyson Ho, an attorney arguing on behalf of SMU. “At issue in this case is whether the conference lacks statutory authorization to challenge SMU’s amendments to its articles of incorporation.”
Sawnie McEntire, though, argued on behalf of the conference that SMU overstepped and didn’t follow procedures when it changed its articles of incorporation.
“Should SMU prevail, they will have interfered with a 100-year history of control, where the church has used SMU as a vehicle to advance its mission,” McEntire said. “That is an important, fundamental right that SMU has had since 1911.”