The Internal Revenue Service has reversed decades of policy regarding political advocacy by religious institutions. The decision, announced Monday, July 7th, came through a court filing in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The IRS stated that churches may endorse political candidates during religious services without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status, signaling a pivotal change in church and state dynamics.
The reinterpretation affects the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 tax code provision barring tax-exempt nonprofits from political endorsements. In a joint motion with the National Religious Broadcasters and two Texas churches, the IRS clarified that religious speech intertwined with faith practices falls outside the scope of political intervention. The motion seeks to settle a lawsuit challenging the amendment’s constitutionality on First Amendment grounds.
The IRS stated, “Communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services…do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted.” The agency emphasized that customary, faith-based communication, even if referencing political issues, is not considered campaign intervention. The court has not yet ruled on the consent judgment proposed by the parties.
The plaintiffs, Sand Springs Church in Athens, First Baptist Church in Waskom, and the National Religious Broadcasters, argued the law infringed on free speech and religious liberty. Legal experts say the decision could encourage more religious organizations to engage in political speech. The Johnson Amendment has long faced criticism, and former President Donald Trump frequently advocated for its repeal, as highlighted in recent legal commentary from the ACLU.
While the IRS did not declare the amendment repealed, the move represents a significant departure from historical enforcement and the Founding Fathers’ support for the separation of church and state. The change may prompt new guidance from the IRS to clarify boundaries for nonprofit political activity. It also raises concerns about the long-term integrity of nonprofit tax law and potential shifts in electoral influence.
The court has yet to issue a final ruling on the consent motion. If approved, it would permanently bar enforcement of the Johnson Amendment against the plaintiff churches. The outcome could establish a legal precedent for broader reinterpretation and may impact future IRS oversight of religious organizations.
