US Supreme Court won’t weigh in on Peter’s Pence lawsuit
What exactly is the lawsuit alleging? And what’s the controversy with Peter’s Pence?
The U.S. Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will not take up a petition from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which had requested the dismissal of a lawsuit alleging fraud over the conference’s promotion of the Peter’s Pence collection.
The lawsuit stretches back to 2020, following media reports indicating that the collection, which is widely viewed as principally for the support of the poor and needy across the globe, was actually used to fund Vatican administration.
What exactly is the lawsuit alleging? And what’s the controversy with Peter’s Pence? The Pillar explains:
What is the case about?
At the center of the lawsuit is Peter’s Pence, an annual offertory collection taken up as an effort to help the Church’s global relief efforts.
Portions of the Peter’s Pence collection have been used to support administrative costs in the Roman Curia for decades.
The collection became connected with scandal when 2019 media reporting claimed that only 10% of funds were distributed to charity, and alleged that Peter’s Pence funds had been used in connection with the Vatican’s controversial London property investment — though reporting from The Pillar found this was not the case, and allegations of a direct link between the fund and the London property scandal were dropped by Vatican prosecutors in 2023.
In 2020, a class action lawsuit was filed against the USCCB, claiming that the conference had promoted the collection as a means of helping impoverished people around the world, when most of the money – hundreds of millions of dollars – was actually placed by the Vatican Secretariat of State into suspect investment funds or used “to plug holes in the Vatican’s administrative budget.”
The lawsuit accuses the conference of fraud, unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty.
What is the plaintiff’s argument?
Plaintiff David O’Connell, a Catholic in Rhode Island, made a donation in 2018 to Peter’s Pence.
He says he did so after the USCCB released misleading messaging, implying that donations would be used to aid the poor and those affected by wars, natural disasters, and disease.
O’Connell says the USCCB “hid this distinction in its promotion, oversight, and administration” of the Peter’s Pence collection.
He says the USCCB “knew or should have known” the likely outcome of how the money would be used.
His attorneys are seeking documents including USCCB-created promotional materials, donor lists, and communications between the USCCB and Vatican officials.
What is the USCCB’s argument?
The USCCB is represented in the case by the religious liberty law firm Becket.
In court documents, Becket has argued that the conference “did not collect the [Peter’s Pence] offering and cannot as a matter of canon law control how it is used.”
It said money collected through Peter’s Pence is given directly to the apostolic nuncio and then transferred to the Holy See.
“USCCB offers promotional materials to dioceses that they may choose to use at their discretion, but USCCB does not oversee, collect, or distribute the offering. And under canon law, USCCB does not control how dioceses choose to speak about Peter’s Pence,” it said.
In addition, Becket says the lawsuit should be dismissed, because the First Amendment prohibits state interference in matters of church governance.
Even moving forward with the lawsuit in court would be a serious violation of the USCCB’s First Amendment rights, Becket says, because of the intrusive nature of the documents and records the plaintiff is seeking to access for the trial.
What have the courts said?
The USCCB has asked that the case be thrown out as being incompatible with the First Amendment.
However, the District Court denied the USCCB’s motion in November 2023, saying the case did not involve religious teaching, governance, or operations.
The USCCB appealed the district court’s ruling, but the U. S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit again rejected the motion to dismiss the suit. The appeals court held that the principle of church autonomy can be used as a defense in the case of a lawsuit, but does not provide immunity from lawsuits.
“Courts may adjudicate secular disputes involving religious institutions where resolution of the case does not require inquiry into doctrinal disputes,” the appeals court said in its April 2025 ruling.
“The church autonomy doctrine protects against judicial interference in ecclesiastical matters; it does not provide religious organizations with a blanket immunity from suit, discovery, or trial,” it added.
The USCCB appealed that ruling as well, asking the Supreme Court to take up the question of whether the lawsuit should be allowed to proceed. The court’s decision this week not to do so is the latest development in the case.
What happens next?
The recent rulings have dealt with whether the lawsuit should be dismissed. They have not dealt with the claims being raised in the lawsuit itself – namely, that the USCCB committed fraud, unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty through its communications regarding the Peter’s Pence collection.
Since the Supreme Court has declined to hear the case at this point, the ruling from the appeals court stands. That means the lawsuit will return to a lower court, which will consider the merits of the case.