The Internal Revenue Service has deemed it legal for tax-exempt places of worship to back political candidates. The Trump Administration pushed for this measure, repealing a 70-year tax code enacted in 1954 by then-Senator Lyndon Johnson known as the “Johnson B. Amendment.”
The Johnson Amendment deemed it necessary for religious organizations to maintain nonpartisan status to protect the Constitutional conditions of separation of church and state. The law forbids churches and other religious organizations from using funds to endorse political candidates. Organizations could vocally support a candidate, but by law, they were unable to financially enter politics as their tax-exempt status came with a nonpartisan clause. All of this is now changing.
“Communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted,” the IRS said in the joint filing Monday with the National Religious Broadcasters group in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
“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 filing said.
Last year, the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) filed a lawsuit against the IRS, claiming that the Johnson Amendment violated their First Amendment rights. The organization believes that the First Amendment protects them from any restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of exercise of religion. Yet, these places of worship also enjoy tax code 501(c)(3) that prevents the government from collecting taxes. In Branch Ministries v. Rossotti (2000), a church attempted to sue after its tax-exempt status was revoked for financially backing a political candidate. The court once again ruled that the Johnson Amendment did not violate the First Amendment.
The court stated that the church was not prohibited from freedom of speech, as they could vocalize their support. However, the tax benefit comes with the condition of remaining nonpartisan. The ruling found the burden was not “substantial” enough to violate constitutional protections.
Repealing the Johnson Act would drastically alter political endorsements as these religious institutions not only have massive funds to spare but could turn them into tax-deductible super PACS. Dark money would certainly flow through these organizations to alter politics as any funds to the church or religious organization could be untraceable. Foreign citizens and nations could also anonymously funnel unlimited amounts of money through these tax-deductible super PACS and directly influence domestic elections.
Jewish temples would become the new AIPAC, the Catholic Church could install their candidate of choice, which would NOT have been Donald Trump, mosques would use donations as they deemed fit, the list goes on and on.
Churches and places of worship are tax-exempt because they maintain “benevolent neutrality,” which dates back to medieval England before it was brought over to colonial America. Political donations are not charitable work or philanthropy. The IRS is attempting to blur the lines between church and state. Conservatives may think that this measure could only benefit their cause, but that is far from the truth, as what constitutes a religious organization is quite vague in the United States. Then public trust of religious institutions would erode as they would be seen as political entities. The core mission of assisting those in need would be completely lost.
