The Federal Public Trust Doctrine of Illinois Central: The Misunderstood Legacy of Appleby v. City of New York

Abstract

The public trust doctrine imposes obligations and restrictions on governments in their exercise of sovereign power over property and resources of great public value. For environmental plaintiffs alleging that the federal government has breached its fiduciary obligation as a steward of natural resources, the vitality of the public trust doctrine hinges on whether courts conclude that it is exclusively a state law doctrine or also applies to the federal government. Courts have split on the issue, disagreeing over the proper scope and application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s seminal 1892 public trust case, Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois. Several courts, including the D.C. Circuit, have leaned on an isolated quotation from Appleby v. City of New York—an obscure 1926 U.S. Supreme Court breach-of-contract case that discussed Illinois Central—for their conclusions that the public trust doctrine does not apply to the federal government. That presumed pillar of support, however, crumbles under scrutiny of the facts and reasoning of Appleby. The Appleby Court in fact recognized and ratified the broad principle of Illinois Central, under which public trust obligations inhere in sovereignty and would thus bind the federal government along with states. This Comment offers a thorough analysis of Appleby that may enable environmental plaintiffs to counter assertions that the Supreme Court has foreclosed the possibility of a federal public trust obligation. Although later Supreme Court dicta suggest otherwise, Appleby supports a conclusion that the public trust doctrine binds all sovereigns, including the federal government.