Whether a State's probate court violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause by permitting substantially higher compensation for corporate trustees without judicial justification

' This case presents a question of exceptional national importance because it implicates the federal constitutional limits on States ’ authority to regulate core economic determinations in trust cases. The national stakes are heightened because modem trust administration is not a localized activity. Corporate trustees —predominantly financial institutions —operate across state lines and administer trusts in all regions of the country. Their compensation practices therefore affect interstate commerce and national financial markets. Uniform constitutional guidance from this Court is necessary to ensure that trustee compensation determinations are grounded in Equal Protection principles rather than institutional privilege. This case reflects national importance and stabilization not only for trustees, but also for trust grantors and beneficiaries in that it is fundamentally unfair for corporate trustees to routinely charge extraordinarily high fees without sufficient court oversight. Specifically, the question in this case addresses whether a State ’s probate court violates the Fourteenth Amendment ’s guarantee of Equal Protection by permitting substantially higher compensation for corporate trustees than for similarly situated individual trustees without requiring any judicial finding that the disparity reflects differences in services performed, risk assumed, or benefit to the beneficiaries.