31-07-2025
National nonprofits push back against changes to law banning churches in politics
A growing group of nonprofits, including a number of major religious organizations, have signed onto a letter urging President Donald Trump to object to recent changes made to a decades-old law governing how churches can be involved in politics.
The Internal Revenue Service said in court filings on July 7 that churches and other religious 501(c)(3) organizations can endorse political candidates in certain circumstances, a major reversal of norms under the Johnson Amendment, which has banned political activity by churches since 1954.
On a July 30 call, a number of organizations including the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, the National Council of Nonprofits, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Interfaith Alliance and more announced their alarm regarding what they called a potential erosion of the separation of church and state.
More: IRS lifts ban on churches getting involved in politics and endorsements: What to know
'The undersigned organizations write to object to efforts by your administration to ignore long-standing federal law by attempting to exempt houses of worship and religious organizations from the Johnson Amendment, which clearly prohibits 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations from endorsing or opposing partisan political candidates for public office,' the letter reads. 'These efforts undermine one of the most trusted sections of civil society – nonpartisan houses of worship and charitable nonprofits.'
The IRS's new position on the rule was made in a joint filing intended to end a lawsuit brought by a group of high-profile Christian organizations last year, including the National Religious Broadcasters and Intercessors for America, along with two Texas churches.
In the filing, the IRS stated that political endorsements made by a church would not be seen as 'participating' or 'intervening' in political campaigns, but instead as a 'family discussion concerning politics.'
'When a house of worship in good faith speaks to its congregation, through its customary channels of communication on matters of faith in connection with religious services, concerning electoral politics viewed through the lens of religious faith, it neither 'participate(s)' nor 'intervene(s)' in a 'political campaign,' within the ordinary meaning of those words,' the agency stated in the filing.
The group of opposing nonprofits disagreed with this stance, stating that politics would quickly move from internal conversations to overwhelming pressure.
'If the court approves this settlement, houses of worship would be subject to intense political pressure to engage in electoral politics from down ballot races and primaries to the presidency, distracting them from their missions,' the letter stated. 'It would also create a loophole for the political donors to enjoy tax deductible donations for their political campaign contributions, exploiting houses of worship for political gains.'
A news release regarding the call states that nearly 1,000 other organizations have already signed on to the letter, which will be open until Aug. 8.
Holly Hollman, general counsel and associate executive director at the Baptist Joint Committee, a Washington D.C.-based nonprofit that was founded in part by the Southern Baptist Convention before the two split, affirmed the organization's opposition to the changes.
'(Attempts to change the Johnson Amendment) have failed previously because they are unpopular, unnecessary, unwise and unwanted,' she said. 'Often, they are promoted based on a misinterpretation of the law in an attempt to say houses of worship are somehow prevented in free speech, while yet we know that houses of worship on a daily basis are using their free speech and their freedom of religion to take care of their communities.'
The Americans United for the Separation of Church and State have filed a motion to intervene on the pending settlement between the IRS and the group of Christian organizations, asking the court to be allowed to intervene as a defendant to defend the Johnson Amendment.
The group also asked that the court 'reject the proposed settlement because it would grant favor and privilege to religious organizations and treat them differently than secular nonprofits– an unconstitutional violation of church-state separation.'
'This longstanding, commonsense rule protects the integrity of both our elections and nonprofits, including houses of worship. The majority of Americans don't want their charities and churches embroiled in the corrupting influence of partisan politics,' said Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, in a statement.
Despite judicial support, Johnson Amendment sees strong pushback from conservative party
The Johnson Amendment was a rule introduced by former President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1954 when he was serving as the U.S. Senate Majority Leader. It banned all tax-exempt organizations like churches and charities from 'directly or indirectly' participating in politics, specifically in endorsement or opposition of candidates.
The Amendment has seen repeated support by federal courts over the years.
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the 1970s that a nonprofit religious organization was not entitled to a tax exemption because its actions, according to the court, sought to influence legislation and 'attack(ed) candidates and incumbents who were considered too liberal.'
The ruling said the government has an 'overwhelming and compelling' interest in keeping the 'wall separating church and state ... high and firm.'
Decades later, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that a religious organization that had its tax-exempt status revoked had 'failed to establish a First Amendment violation' in the case.
Despite judicial affirmation of the standard, the rule has seen steady opposition — particularly by the Trump administration.
Trump pledged in his first term to 'totally destroy' the Johnson Amendment and later claimed to have 'gotten rid of' the provision, but the law has remained part of the tax code. Trump did, however, direct the Treasury Department to avoid penalizing religious organizations for speech about 'moral or political issues from a religious perspective' in a May 2017 executive order.
In response to the July 7 change to the rule, Trump called the move 'terrific.'
"I love the fact that churches could endorse a political candidate," Trump told reporters at the White House, according to Reuters. "If somebody of faith wants to endorse, I think it's something that I'd like to hear."
The support is not limited to the White House. Rep. Mark Harris, R-NC, and Sen. James Lankford, R-OK, introduced the Free Speech Fairness Act in March that sought to allow charitable organizations – which would include churches and other houses of worship − to make political statements 'if such statements are made in the ordinary course of carrying out its tax-exempt purpose.'
'For too long, the Johnson Amendment has silenced pastors, churches and non-profits from engaging on moral and political issues of our day for fear of losing their tax-exempt status,' Harris said in a March news release. 'This attempt to muzzle people of faith must end – the Constitution is clear: Americans' right to free speech shall not be infringed.'
Notably, speakers at the inaugural meeting of Trump's Religious Liberty Commission in June also supported challenges to the Johnson Amendment and expressed a belief that the First Amendment doesn't prevent the government from promoting religion as a social good.
The USA TODAY Network - The South region's coverage of First Amendment issues is funded through a collaboration between the Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners.
Have a story to tell? Reach Angele Latham by email at alatham@ by phone at 931-623-9485, or follow her on Twitter at @angele_latham
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Nonprofits push back against changes to Johnson Amendment
