The IRS lets churches preach politics — and keep the tax break

Yahoo

08-07-2025

Under the Trump administration, the Internal Revenue Service just changed a decadeslong ban on places of worship and other tax-exempt groups from advocating for a political candidate.
That means church leaders now have the right to endorse political candidates from the pulpit without risking tax-exempt status.
What does this mean for separation of church and state?
The change in IRS code came after a lawsuit tried to challenge the Johnson Amendment, a longstanding principle of separation of church and state that exists to prevent religious organizations from functioning as de facto political PACs, which are financed through tax-deductible donations.
The legal provision was named in 1954 for Lyndon B. Johnson, then a Texas senator years before he became a U.S. president.
Previously, the law prohibited charities and churches from engaging in political campaign activity by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one 'which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.'
The case was brought against the IRS and its commissioner, Billy Long, by the National Religious Broadcasters, Intercessors for America, and two Texas churches, challenging the guardrails the Johnson Amendment has on 'their First Amendment rights to the freedom of speech and free exercise of religion, their Fifth Amendment rights to due process of law and equal protection under the law, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.'
The IRS made its decision in response to the lawsuit on Monday, stating that '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.'
It also said that it does 'not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted.'
Responses to the news were mixed, as some saw the shift by the IRS as desecrating the name of religion for political gain, while others viewed it as a fight against oppression that congregations faced when trying to teach biblical teachings to understand modern-day political issues.
The National Council of Nonprofits stated in a press release that allowing churches to endorse political candidates 'assaults' the idea that nonprofits should remain nonpartisan.
'This action — long sought by President Trump — is not about religion or free speech, but about radically altering campaign finance laws. The decree could open the floodgates for political operatives to funnel money to their preferred candidates while receiving generous tax breaks at the expense of taxpayers who may not share those views," Diane Yentel, President and CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits, said.
'These institutions are among the last trusted spaces where individuals can come together across political lines to address community needs. Repealing or weakening the Johnson Amendment risks politicizing these spaces, undermining their integrity, effectiveness, and the public's confidence in them.'
Some political leaders, including Republican South Carolina Rep. Mark Harris, said on social media that the IRS should never have had the right to 'infringe' on Americans' First Amendment rights.
Doug Andersen, a spokesperson for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, told the Deseret News that the church remains firm in its stance of neutrality.
'We're a global organization, along with appropriate individual member engagement,' Andersen said, emphasizing the political neutrality and participation policy for the Church that states it does not 'Endorse, promote or oppose political parties and their platforms or candidates for political office' or 'Allow its Church buildings, membership lists or other resources to be used for political purposes,' etc.