logo
IRS says churches can now endorse political candidates. Miami faith leaders weigh in

IRS says churches can now endorse political candidates. Miami faith leaders weigh in

Miami Herald20-07-2025
The Internal Revenue Services is reversing a long-standing policy and will now allow religious institutions to endorse political candidates without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status — a move that has divided faith leaders and advocacy groups.
Earlier this month, the IRS sided with the National Religious Broadcasters, an evangelical media group, and two Texas churches in a court filing intended to settle a lawsuit that challenged a ban on most nonprofits from endorsing political candidates in elections.
While most Americans, according to multiple public opinion polls, want to keep politics out of the pulpit, many conservative Christian groups, including the ones named in the lawsuit, have been pushing for more freedom for faith leaders to voice opinions — a view repeatedly advocated by President Donald Trump throughout his time in office.
Many advocates and faith leaders in South Florida who spoke with the Miami Herald remain strongly opposed to the decision, fearing raising such issues threaten to create rifts within individual congregations. But while conservative Christian groups have been most outspoken in support of the move, it also could work both ways, allowing more freedom for progressive churches and leaders to advocate for issues that straddle the line of religion and politics.
The lawsuit argues that the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 measure named after its author, former President Lyndon B. Johnson, restricts churches from exercising freedom of speech and freedom of religion. It also contends that the amendment is not enforced fairly — allowing some nonprofits, such as newspapers, to endorse candidates while others are banned.
During President Donald Trump's first term in 2017, he vowed to 'get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.'
While, the IRS didn't go that far, it did suggest that when a house of worship 'in good faith' speaks to its congregation through 'customary channels of communication on matters of faith in connection with religious services concerning electoral politics,' it did not constitute participation or intervention in politics, as the Johnson Amendment prohibits.
In a proposed consent judgment between the tax agency and religious groups, the IRS said those types of communications are akin to 'a family discussion,' and 'do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted,' according to the proposed settlement filed in U.S. District Court in Texas.
The IRS, in its court filing, also admitted that the Johnson amendment has not been consistently enforced since it was enacted, despite the fact that churches throughout the country violate it on a regular basis, according to a 2022 investigation from the Texas Tribune and ProPublica.
The proposed settlement could have broad implications for political rhetoric in places of worship. WhiIe it applies specifically to plaintiffs in the lawsuit, advocacy groups and faith leaders who spoke with the Miami Herald are concerned it sets a precedent that will embolden other houses of worship to engage in partisan endorsements.
'It's a slippery slope and I feel like this is crossing the line. This is definitely crossing the line,'said Rabbi Gayle Pomerantz, senior rabbi at Temple Beth Sholom, a Reform synagogue in Miami Beach.
'Endorsing a candidate outright from the pulpit can lead to divisiveness and alienation within our congregations,' said Rev. Keny Felix, the senior pastor of Bethel Evangelical Baptist Church in Miami Gardens.
'Weaponizes religious freedom'
Interfaith Alliance, a nonprofit that advocates for religious freedom and against Christian Nationalism, said the lawsuit 'weaponizes religious freedom.'
'They talk about free speech and religious freedom, when in reality what keeps our houses of worship free for religious communities is the separation of church and state,' said Guthrie Graves-Fitzsimmons, vice president of programs and strategy at Interfaith Alliance.
'Imagine if every church in Florida was just an outpost of the GOP or the DNC, that would be a complete denial of religious freedom. It would destroy institutions that are sacred to so many Floridians.'
Graves-Fitzsimmons, who is also an ordained Baptist deacon, pointed out that current law already allows houses of worship to engage with politics in many ways.
For example, faith leaders can invite candidates to speak with their congregations as long as they provide equal opportunity to all parties. Many houses of worship host events encouraging members to vote — Souls to the Polls is an important event in many Black churches, for example — and some churches are polling places themselves.
Nonprofits and churches are even allowed, under current law, to donate to campaigns on certain issues or ballot questions that align with their mission, as long as it is not a partisan race. The Catholic Church donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-abortion efforts to defeat a recent ballot question in Florida, for example.
Local faith leaders weigh in
'I am absolutely taken back by that ruling,' said Rev. Laurie Hafner, lead pastor at Coral Gables Congregational United Church of Christ.
Hafner's church has been on the front lines of advocating for issues some might see as political. In 2023, the church partnered with local bookstore, Books & Books, to organize a protest march against Florida's recent efforts to ban certain books in public schools. In recent years, she made national news for suing the state of Florida over its abortion ban on the grounds of religious rights.
Hafner said after a close call with the IRS at her past church in Cleveland, she's been careful about how she speaks about political candidates from the pulpit. Still, she said, most of her congregants know where she stands politically, due to her strong stances on issues.
'I have never from the pulpit endorsed a particular candidate, although I think I make it very clear what side I'm on,' Hafner told the Miami Herald. 'And that's the side of the oppressed, the hungry, the homeless, the folks who are in prison, the immigrant … and certain candidates are a reflection of those values.'
'I don't know if this is going to change my position about endorsing the candidate from the pulpit, but it does give me a little more freedom, I think, to express myself if need be,' she said.
Others expressed their disapproval over the IRS statements.
'I am strongly opposed to abolishing the Johnson Amendment,' said Rabbi Pomerantz, who was also the first female president of the Rabbinic Association of Greater Miami.
'I think it's helped to preserve the separation of church and state, and we at Temple Beth Sholom have always been very careful about promoting our Jewish values in non-partisan ways,' she said, referring to the Johnson Amendment.
Pomerantz said her synagogue does not endorse candidates or advocate for issues in the name of Democrats or Republicans. She said, however, Temple Beth Sholom may take a position on an issue — like reproductive rights for example — informed by Jewish tradition and Jewish texts.
'We'll always have members of the congregation who don't agree with the position the synagogue has taken. But we feel it is our right and our duty to take positions on meaningful issues, in a non partisan way.'
Concerns about endorsement
Miami Gardens pastor Felix said he agrees with encouraging members to participate in the political system but draws the line at candidate endorsements.
'We have to be careful to not conflate God's kingdom with any one political party or candidate. If we do, our efforts will eventually prove to be misguided,' said Felix in an email to the Herald.
Felix said he believes that pastors are responsible for 'providing moral leadership and clarity' on issues impacting the community — which may sometimes include advocating for justice and speaking 'on behalf of the marginalized and the underrepresented.'
'What unifies a diverse congregation is our common faith, not our political affiliation,' said Felix.
Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner, Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, said one of his main issues with the IRS ruling is that it potentially can 'corrupt' institutions that have always remained non-partisan.
'Part of what makes them spiritually pure is that they stay non-partisan,' Pesner said. 'They're about values, morals, deeply held beliefs … but when money starts flowing into religious institutions to win partisan battles and elect individual candidates, it corrupts those institutions.'
Pesner's concern about the potential for the decision to interfere with campaign finance was also echoed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
'Weakening this law would undermine houses of worship and nonprofits by transforming them into political action committees, flooding our elections with even more dark money,' the group wrote in a statement.
Faith leaders 'can move the needle'
One advocacy group, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, took steps last week to reverse the decision in the lawsuit by filing a motion to intervene. The nonprofit, which advocates for the separation of church and state and religious freedom, said the decision 'would grant favor and privilege to religious organizations and treat them differently than secular nonprofits.'
'The Trump administration's radical reinterpretation of the Johnson Amendment is a flagrant, self-serving attack on church-state separation that threatens our democracy by favoring houses of worship over other nonprofits and inserting them into partisan politics,' said AU President and CEO Rachel Laser in a statement.
Laser went on to say that the Johnson Amendment 'protects the integrity' of elections and nonprofit organizations, including houses of worship.
Many who spoke with the Herald pointed to recent polling that shows that most Americans want to leave politics out of the pulpit.
According to a 2022 poll from Pew Research Center, 77 percent of U.S. adults said churches and other congregations should not make political endorsements. Majorities in both the Democratic and Republican parities and every religious group that was polled also said churches should avoid political endorsements.
On the other hand, the National Faith Advisory Board, a faith coalition founded and led by Paula White Cain, senior advisor to President Trump in the newly established White House Faith Office, celebrated the move by the IRS, calling it a 'tax clarification' that was 'born out of faith leaders advocating for their God-given rights.'
'It is a crucial reminder that faith leaders can move the needle when it comes to influencing the law of the land. Our collective voice matters,' the organization wrote in a weekly newsletter.
The newsletter also went on to advise its readers to avoid 'paid ads, public rallies hosted by your church and using church resources to endorse a candidate to the public.'
The faith advisory board was founded during Trump's first presidency by White and says it communicates with over 70,000 faith leaders across the country.
This story was produced with financial support from Trish and Dan Bell and from donors comprising the South Florida Jewish and Muslim Communities, including Khalid and Diana Mirza, in partnership with Journalism Funding Partners. The Miami Herald maintains full editorial control of this work.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Six months in, young people have soured on Trump's job handling
Six months in, young people have soured on Trump's job handling

Yahoo

time2 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Six months in, young people have soured on Trump's job handling

Since Donald Trump took office for his second term, his job ratings have markedly declined — and more with young people than any other age group. What has made so many young Americans change their minds so quickly? For context, President Trump's electoral performance with voters under 30 improved a lot in 2024: While he lost this group to former Vice President Kamala Harris, it was by a much smaller margin than in 2020. And men under 30 ended up splitting roughly evenly between Trump and Harris. These trends prompted some observers to marvel at how conservative Gen Z had become, especially young men, and to wonder whether it marked a durable change. About half a year on from Inauguration Day, many young people have changed their minds on Trump. It looks more like many young voters gave him the benefit of the doubt when he took office, but their evaluations of him quickly started to sink. Among Americans ages 18-29, his job approval rating has fallen from a high of 55% just after he was inaugurated to 28% now. That means that half of his former approvers now disapprove. In percentage-point terms, the size of that drop is more than double what we've seen in any other age group. Which young voters have dropped off? Among young people, it's the less partisan and politically engaged who have seen the steepest drops. For example, about half of independents under 30 approved of Mr. Trump in February, but that has dropped to about one in five now. The same is true of young people who didn't vote in the 2024 election. Party identifiers and '24 voters have fallen off, too, but not to the same extent. There are also differences by gender, with young men starting out more approving of Mr. Trump than young women were. Women's ratings of the president had already begun dipping by March, while it was not until April — and the downturn in the U.S. stock market — that young men's ratings started to decline. Both have fallen steadily since then, but a faster drop among young men in the last few months has meant the gender gap in approval of Mr. Trump has shrunk. (See the bottom of this article for statistical details on estimating these smaller subgroups.) CBS News polling over the past few months offers several clues as to what young people are unhappy about these days. A majority now say Mr. Trump is doing different things than he promised during the 2024 campaign. That's a reversal in sentiment from early February, when seven in 10 said he's doing what he said he would. And it's young men who have been the most likely to flip on this question. On top of that, the administration is experiencing low points on several economic evaluations: The share of young people saying the economy is getting worse has risen to six in 10. And young Americans are less likely than older ones to see the job market as good. Overtime, young people have increasingly rated it as fairly or very in 10 also tell us that Mr. Trump's policies are making them worse off financially. That is the highest we've seen to date, and it represents a complete change from what young people expected when he was inaugurated. Back then, they were much more likely to say his policies would make them better off than worse majorities feel the Trump administration is focusing too much on tariffs (72%), deportations (64%), and ending DEI programs (55%). These shares have all grown significantly over time. By contrast, seven in 10 say the administration isn't focusing enough on lowering prices, which was a key campaign issue. Looking back and ahead… Instead of marking a permanent rightward shift, Mr. Trump's better-than-expected performance with young voters last year is beginning to look more like a temporary reaction. Indeed, less partisan voters tend to be more responsive to short-term forces, like the economic conditions that drove many at the ballot box in 2024. And when Trump was inaugurated, many young people hoped he would turn the economy around, with his initial ratings likely reflecting some optimism. This honeymoon period quickly faded. His 18-29 rating is now below Joe Biden's when he left office. Looking ahead to 2026, Republicans' electoral success may depend on both the president's numbers and youth turnout. If views of Mr. Trump's job handling don't improve over the next year, they could be a drag on GOP congressional candidates. And while young voters are less likely to turn out in non-presidential years, both the 2018 and 2022 midterms saw record numbers go to the polls, including voters under 30. In fact, in 2022, young voters turned out at a rate that came close to saving the Democrats' majority. In a tight contest, they could be pivotal again. Estimating small subgroups in polls In order to more precisely estimate trends in approval among young people, I aggregated our polls and ran a statistical model that controls for respondents' race, education level, 2024 vote, and survey date. Why take this approach? All polls have a margin of error, and the margin of error is greater for subgroups within the poll, as a function of sample size and routine weighting. So, even though young people are represented proportionate to their share of the population, estimating what percentage of them approve of the president naturally comes with a higher margin of error. It's driven by random variation in which types of young people respond to a given poll, and margins of error grow as you slice data more thinly — for instance, in disaggregating young people by gender. Since a single poll can only do so much, we can combine data across polls to boost sample sizes and gain confidence in our estimates. Aggregating surveys yields sample sizes of over 1,200 men and 1,300 women under 30 to analyze. And the model smoothens out poll-to-poll randomness within these subgroups. The modeled estimates for any given time point are consistently within range of the unmodeled survey data, typically within a few points. And importantly, they tell the same story: both young men and young women's views of Trump have worsened, and the gender gap has decreased. John Oliver: The 60 Minutes Interview Finding the plane used for Argentina's dictatorship-era "death flights" | 60 Minutes Immigration agent told 18-year-old U.S. citizen "you got no rights here" during arrest

Trump's EPA to repeal finding that climate pollution endangers human health
Trump's EPA to repeal finding that climate pollution endangers human health

USA Today

time4 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump's EPA to repeal finding that climate pollution endangers human health

WASHINGTON - The Environmental Protection Agency will rescind the long-standing finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health, as well as tailpipe emission standards for vehicles, setting off what it describes as the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history. Republican President Donald Trump's pick to run the EPA Lee Zeldin announced the agency's plan to rescind the "endangerment finding" on the Ruthless podcast on Tuesday, saying it will save Americans money and unravel two decades of regulation aimed at reducing carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases from cars, power plants, oil production and other sources. In 2009, the EPA under former Democratic President Barack Obama issued a finding that emissions from new motor vehicles contribute to pollution and endanger public health and welfare. It was upheld in several legal challenges and underpinned subsequent greenhouse gas regulations. "With regard to the endangerment finding, they'll say carbon dioxide is a pollutant and that's the end of it. They'll never acknowledge any type of benefit or need for carbon dioxide," Zeldin told the podcast. "It's important to note, and they don't, how important it is for the planet." Reuters reported last week that the EPA plans to repeal all greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-duty vehicles and engines in the coming days after it removes the scientific finding that justified those rules, according to a summary. It is also expected to justify rescinding the endangerment finding by casting doubt on the scientific record used to make the finding, saying that "developments cast significant doubt on the reliability of the findings," the summary seen by Reuters says. The U.S. Supreme Court, in its landmark Massachusetts v. EPA case in 2007, said the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and required the agency to make a scientific finding on whether they endanger public health. If finalized, this action will devastate the EPA's ability to carry out its primary authority to limit climate pollution under the federal Clean Air Act. Environmental activists immediately condemned the announcement. 'As if any doubt remained, the Trump Administration has formalized climate denial as the official policy of the United States government," said Sierra Club Acting Executive Director Loren Blackford in a statement. "If approved, rescinding the endangerment finding would strike a decisive blow to the EPA's authority to limit deadly greenhouse gas emissions and protect our people and our planet from the very worst of the climate crisis. Nearly every single day we see increased incidents of extreme weather, record heatwaves, deadly floods and droughts all threatening our lives and communities—all of which are the undeniable result of greenhouse gas emissions. 'The Trump administration is again taking a sledgehammer to the very foundation of our government and settled law, and doing so only to the benefit of corporate polluters while we pay the price." Zeldin said he will make the formal announcement on Tuesday afternoon in Indiana. Contributing: Ben Adler

Nancy Mace's Shocking Hobby Sparks Outrage Online
Nancy Mace's Shocking Hobby Sparks Outrage Online

Buzz Feed

time4 minutes ago

  • Buzz Feed

Nancy Mace's Shocking Hobby Sparks Outrage Online

After spending her days terrorizing her colleagues and constituents, Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) apparently likes to unwind by doing something that's so cartoonishly evil it sounds like something The Simpsons would've written for Mr. Burns. On Sunday, Mace appeared on Fox Report Weekend and shared one of her new 'favorite' hobbies with host Jon Scott. 'I have to tell you, one of my favorite things to watch on YouTube these days are the court hearings where illegals are in court, and ICE shows up to drag them out of court and deport them,' Mace said, presumably while stroking a white cat on her lap like a James Bond villain. Mace, unfortunately, continued, 'I can think of nothing more American today than keeping our streets safer by getting those violent criminals out of the United States of America, and we all have Donald J. Trump to thank for it.' Mace: One of my favorite things to watch on YouTube these days are the court hearings where illegals are in court and ICE shows up to drag them out of court and deport them. I can think of nothing more American… — Acyn (@Acyn) July 27, 2025 @Acyn/ Fox News Considering that the Trump administration's aggressive and inhumane deportation policies are unpopular with a majority of Americans, many users on X, formerly Twitter, were disgusted by Mace's remarks. This is her idea of humor. She is a sick person. — gotochelle 🇺🇸 (@gotochelle) July 28, 2025 @gotochelle I can think of nothing LESS American. This shows how far America has fallen. — A Faceless Man (@FacelessMan13) July 28, 2025 @facelessman13 That's not American. That's Nazi Germany type shit. — Machine Pun Kelly 🇺🇦 (@KellyScaletta) July 27, 2025 @kellyscaletta Nothing says 'land of the free' like cheering on courtroom deportation videos like they're cat clips. @NancyMace, maybe binge-watch some history instead. America was built by immigrants, not applause for cruelty. — Chetter 📢🗽⚖💙 Beacon for Democracy (@ChetterHub) July 27, 2025 @chetterhub Isn't it a little odd that Ice goes after the people who show up for Court hearings and are trying to do things right? Wouldn't you think Ice would focus on the people who aren't showing up to Court hearings first? — Dan Keitel (@Defeatdictators) July 27, 2025 @defeatdictators Yeah, violent criminals who dont respect the law always go to court for their immigration hearing. Trump is such a weak leader he has to go for the easiest targets. People who are trying to follow the law as best they can in the situation they are in. — Manna (@OhMyManna) July 27, 2025 @ohmymanna A longer clip of Mace's appearance on Fox Report Weekend, which was obtained by the Daily Beast, shows that Mace's Dr. Evil-esque comments were prompted by a graphic featured on Scott's show that read, 'Trump Crackdown in Sanctuary Cities.' The graphic seemed to indicate that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers in New York City have risen 400% since former President Joe Biden was in office. 'Clearly, there's a new sheriff in town,' Scott said. Fox News / @Acyn Mace agreed before adding the fun little tidbit that she's proposed a new bill to 'defund and take tax breaks' away from so-called sanctuary cities like New York. Trump and the Republican Party have long utilized racist rhetoric implying that all undocumented people are rapists and murderers. But recent data collected by the Deportation Data Project, a group that collects immigration numbers, indicates that about 30,000 people in immigration detention do not have a criminal record, NPR reports. Last week, HuffPost's Matt Shuham described what he saw over five days in immigration court in New York City this month. One of the more shocking quotes Shuham got during his time observing at the courthouse was from an unnamed federal agent involved with immigration court arrests. 'This is fishing in a stocked pool,' the agent told Shuham. 'You tell them, 'Show up at this location,' and then they show up and you grab them.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store