Bill would allow charitable nonprofits to endorse candidates
SALT LAKE CITY, June 10 (UPI) -- Republican lawmakers have introduced a bill that would amend a provision in the Internal Revenue Code to allow nonprofit entities, including houses of worship, to endorse or oppose political candidates.
Under the current provision in the tax code, called the Johnson Amendment, a charitable nonprofit may not participate in, or intervene in -- including publishing or distributing statements -- any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office.
The Free Speech Fairness Act would change that by permitting statements by organizations that have Section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status "if such statements are made in the ordinary course of carrying out [their] tax-exempt purpose."
Entities with 501(c)(3) status -- including churches, synagogues, mosques and other places of worship -- are exempted from taxation, and donations to them are tax-deductible for the donors. Penalties for violating the Johnson Amendment include revocation of the organization's tax-exempt status.
Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., who, with Rep. Mark Harris, R-N.C., introduced the bicameral legislation March 31, said the act is needed to uphold free speech protections. The Senate bill is in early legislative stages, while the House bill has been referred to the Ways and Means Committee.
"Fundamental American values must extend to everyone, including pastors, social workers, or non-profit employees and volunteers," Lankford said in a news release. "Everyone should have their constitutional rights to assembly, free speech, freedom of religion and free press protected."
The legislation would affect only the prohibition related to political candidate support or opposition. Nonprofits presently can engage in a limited amount of lobbying and advocacy for or against issues in the political arena, including ballot measures, according to the IRS.
Rick Cohen, chief communications officer and chief operating officer of the National Council of Nonprofits, said nonprofits already "can and should and do speak out on issues" within the tax code limits.
"All [the Johnson Amendment] is saying is you can't get involved in pushing a candidate for office, and there are plenty of ways to be effective in your work without crossing that line," Cohen said of the Johnson Amendment.
The amendment, enacted in 1954, is named for then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson, who championed the law. It does not prevent religious leaders from endorsing candidates outside their position as clergy, such as talking to friends and family or supporting their candidacy on their personal social media pages.
There have been attempts throughout the years to eliminate the Johnson Amendment. During his first term, President Donald Trump in 2017 signed an executive order stopping its enforcement, but the law remains on the books.
Alessandro Terenzoni, vice president of public policy at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said the Johnson Amendment protects the integrity of elections and nonprofits.
"Repealing or weakening this law would change the character of nonprofits as we know them," Terenzoni said. "It could transform houses of worship into political action committees, flooding our elections with even more dark money."
He said polls have repeatedly shown a broad cross-section of Americans, including faith leaders, evangelical Christians and Republicans, do not want houses of worship endorsing or opposing candidates.
"Congressional leadership would be wise to remember that when the Johnson Amendment was threatened during Trump's first administration, more than 4,500 faith leaders, 5,500 nonprofit organizations and 106 religious and denominational organizations weighed in to strongly oppose weakening or repealing the current law," Terenzoni said.
There is an array of opinions among churches on whether they should be involved in politics or talk about political issues, according to Jeremy Dys, senior counsel for First Liberty Institute, a nonprofit public interest law firm. The houses of worship, not the government, should make the call, he said.
"So if you decide you don't want to talk about politics in your church, that's fine," Dys said. "If you decide you do want to talk about politics or what your faith brings to bear upon a political discussion, we support your right to do that, as well."
He said Johnson added the amendment language to the IRS code because he had been opposed by Texas churches in his re-election campaign.
"That type of restraint on speech has no business in our country that otherwise values freedom of speech," Dys said. "Congress would do well to just simply eliminate the Johnson Amendment."
Separate IRS investigations of possible Johnson Amendment violations by two churches represented by attorneys with First Liberty and the Jones Day law firm were closed this spring.
In Florida, Jill Woolbright, a candidate running for re-election to the Flagler County School Board, stopped by New Way Christian Fellowship in Palm Coast on a Sunday in 2022 and addressed the congregation during the service about the importance of her faith and why she was running for office. Then, the pastor prayed for her, Dys said.
"And that was enough for the IRS to come after the church," he said.
The agency sent a letter to the church in June 2024, saying it had information that indicated New Way may have conducted "political campaign intervention activities." Allowing one candidate for office to speak at an event without providing all candidates with the same opportunity could be a violation, the letter said.
Dys and John Gore, an attorney at Jones Day, said the basis for the investigation was unconstitutional.
"Indeed, government inquiry into a church's exercise and expression of its beliefs during worship services is irreconcilable with the First Amendment's core protections of religious independence and free exercise, free speech and free association," they said in a letter to the IRS.
The agency closed its investigation in April, saying it had determined that the church's activities "continue to allow you to be exempt from paying federal income tax."
For Grace Church St. Louis in Missouri, it was important its members be involved with their government at every level, Dys said. Its civic engagement group researched websites of candidates running in the 2022 local school board elections, posted the information on the church's website and made a physical copy available at the church, he said.
The candidates included church members Linda Henning, who was running for a seat on the Ritenour School Board, and Jeff Mintzlaff, who was running in the Kirkwood School Board race. Their fellow congregants were encouraged by the church to support them for being willing to run for office, which prompted the IRS to start an investigation, Dys said.
The lawyers called the examination an improper government intrusion into a church's religious affairs. Ultimately, the agency backed off and affirmed what Grace Church is doing is legal and constitutional and the investigation was closed in May, Dys said.
Woolbright, Henning and Mintzlaff all lost their races.
A lawsuit filed against the IRS by four nonprofit religious organizations -- the Washington, D.C.-based National Religious Broadcasters; two Texas churches, Sand Springs Church in Athens and First Baptist Church Waskom; and Intercessors for America, a Virginia ministry organization that leads a movement of prayer and fasting for the nation's leaders -- is seeking a declaration that the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional.
The Internal Revenue Code prohibits only nonprofits organized under Section 501(c)(3) from communicating their views about political candidates, according to the suit, which was filed Aug. 28 in U.S. District Court in Tyler, Texas. All for-profit corporations and all nonprofits organized under any other section of the code can speak freely, the suit says.
Hundreds of newspapers are organized under Section 501(c)(3), yet many openly endorse political candidates, the suit adds.
"Plaintiffs simply contend that they should also have the same freedom of speech," the suit concludes.
The National Council of Nonprofits said the suit contributes to the further politicization of the charitable sector and society.
"It will be opposed vigorously by the National Council of Nonprofits and all who are committed to serving communities rather than ideologues, self-serving politicians and their political operatives," the national council said.
Surveys conducted in 2017 showed 72% of the public supported keeping the Johnson Amendment in place and nearly 90% of evangelical leaders said it is wrong for preachers to endorse candidates from the pulpit, the council said.
Cohen said nonprofits prefer to stay above the partisan fray because it helps them do their work effectively no matter who's in office.
"We want our houses of worship to be a place where all are welcome and the same applies for all other nonprofits," Cohen said.
"All they care about is that if you're donating or volunteering, that you want to help make the world a better place. And when you come through their door, it's about whether you need their services or not, not your political leanings."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sen. John Kennedy and Linda McMahon make significant math error in congressional hearing
On Tuesday, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon tested before the Senate on behalf of Trump's 2026 budget. During this hearing, McMahon and Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy were discussing federal spending for grant programs for disadvantaged students when the pair made a significant mathematical error. The math error occurred when the two spoke on how much the government has spent in the duration of ten years on TRIO and the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). After McMahon confirmed to Kennedy that the government spends approximately $1.58 billion a year on TRIO and has been funding this program for over ten years, Kennedy said, "So that's over a trillion dollars that we've spent on this program..." "We give this money, as I appreciate it, to colleges and universities to encourage poor kids to go to college,' said Kennedy before he went on to imply that colleges have been stealing this grant money from the government for their own purposes, The New Republic reported. McMahon failed to catch and correct Kennedy's math error, however, Sen. John Reed spoke up and corrected the counting mistake. 'I'm not a great mathematician, but I think you were talking about a trillion dollars? I believe $1.5 billion times 10 is $15 billion, and that's a little bit off from a trillion dollars,' said Reed. McMahon said in response that the budget cuts $1.2 billion, to which Reed then replied, "Well that would be $12 billion, not a trillion dollars." Presley Bo Tyler is a reporter for the Louisiana Deep South Connect Team for Gannett/USA Today. Find her on X @PresleyTyler02 and email at PTyler@ This article originally appeared on Shreveport Times: Sen. John Kennedy math error. What he said education costs


Axios
28 minutes ago
- Axios
Public media funding cuts hit Chicago: WBEZ, WTTW brace for impact
President Trump and the Republican-majority U.S. House moved one step closer to cutting funding for public media, putting local organizations in limbo. The latest: The House passed a bill Thursday afternoon to cancel over $1 billion in funding for PBS and NPR, via the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. This funding was included in the 2025 fiscal year budget, but this action removes it. Why it matters: Federal funding for public media could vanish — and Chicago stations like WBEZ and WTTW are bracing for the fallout. The big picture: The move breaks decades of bipartisan tradition treating CPB funding as apolitical and throws public media companies into budgetary chaos. What they're saying: "If approved, this cancellation of funding would eliminate critical investments, stripping resources that we use to power independent journalism, educational programming, emergency alerts and the infrastructure that supports the entire network of newsrooms nationwide," Chicago Public Media CEO Melissa Bell wrote to station members. "This could threaten the ability of PBS, and member stations like WTTW, to operate autonomously," a WTTW spokesperson said in a statement. By the numbers: The cuts would amount to about 6 percent of Chicago Public Media's budget, which the organization estimates to be about $3 million annually. That's not factoring in possible syndication costs handed down by National Public Radio, which is also losing funding from this bill. For WTTW, 10% of its 2024 budget came from federal funding. Zoom in: Chicago Public Media and WTTW (which also includes WFMT-FM) are among the largest public media organizations. Chicago Public Media (WBEZ/Sun-Times) reported revenue of $70 million for 2024, while WTTW had a total operating budget of $32.7 million. Both organizations receive significant revenue from member donations. Yes, but: Smaller Illinois radio stations, such as WILL-FM in Urbana, WUIS-FM in Springfield, and WNIJ-FM in DeKalb, have significantly higher federal funding, in some cases accounting for half of their budgets. Those stations are attached to local universities. Zoom out: It's unclear if the organizations will supercharge fundraising to attract more private donors or cut back on programming and staff. Chicago Public Media recently cut staff at both the Sun-Times and WBEZ. The intrigue: The rescission package aims to claw back funding that Congress previously approved for fiscal year 2025. It primarily consists of cuts identified by DOGE, which include funding for foreign aid programs such as USAID. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting's funding is usually allocated every two years, so this cuts the second year of funding and puts future allocations in serious doubt. The rescission bill is rare in government. Trump attempted to use it during his first term, but was defeated in the Senate. Between the lines: Republicans have increasingly painted public media as left-leaning and biased, citing PBS programs like "Sesame Street" as "woke propaganda." The other side: Public media offers a variety of independent programming from news, culture, food and children's programs, funded to avoid programming influenced by corporations and commercials.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kilmar Abrego Garcia officially enters not-guilty plea on trafficking charges
June 13 (UPI) -- Kilmar Abrego Garcia on Friday formally pleaded not-guilty to federal human trafficking and conspiracy charges. Abrego Garcia's wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, also said a court appearance this week was the first time she was able to see her husband since he was arrested and detained in March. The Salvadorian migrant was returned to the United States earlier this month after being deported to a prison in El Salvador. "Even though it was through a video screen, I was finally able to see Kilmar," Vasquez Sura, who is a U.S. citizen, told supporters at a rally in Nashville. "I'm grateful for everyone who has been fighting for this milestone, in this fight to bring my husband back home with our children." The couple were living in Maryland with their young children at the time Abrego Garcia was arrested. Lawyers will now argue in front of U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes whether the 29-year-old should be granted bail before trial. Prosecutors have argued he "would have enormous reason to flee" if released. Abrego Garcia was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in March and eventually deported to El Salvador. Supporters argued Abrego Garcia was denied due process in the deportation proceedings A U.S. District Court judge later ordered the federal government to "facilitate" his return, after the Justice Department later acknowledged Abrego Garcia's deportation was made in error. President Donald Trump's administration pushed back against efforts to bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States. In 2019, a federal judge ruled in 2019 that Abrego Garcia could be deported, but not back to his home country of El Salvador. He was indicted on two federal charges last month before his return to the United States. Abrego Garcia is accused of playing a "significant role in an alien smuggling ring," dating back as far as 2016, Attorney General Pam Bondi said at the time of the indictment. Bondi said if Abrego Garcia is found guilty, he will be returned to El Salvador. Police stopped the vehicle he was driving in Tennessee in 2002 and found several Hispanic men with no identification. After he was returned to the United States, Abrego Garcia was immediately sent to Tennessee to face the federal charges. Federal officials also contend Abrego Garcia was a member of the El Salvadoran MS-13 gang, accusations he and his family deny. They argue Abrego Garcia fled El Salvador because of the threat of gang violence.