In a major shift with far-reaching implications for American religious and political life, the Internal Revenue Service has formally acknowledged that churches and houses of worship can endorse political candidates without forfeiting their tax-exempt status — provided such endorsements are communicated through traditional internal channels like sermons, bulletins, or congregational meetings.
In a joint court filing submitted Monday as part of a legal settlement effort, the IRS stated that internal political communications by churches are akin to private family discussions about politics and do not violate the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 law prohibiting 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations from engaging in political campaigning.
“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 its statement.
The clarification comes amid a lawsuit brought by two Texas churches and a Christian media organization, who argued that the Johnson Amendment violated their First Amendment rights to free speech and religious exercise, as well as their Fifth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection.
The plaintiffs had initially sought to strike down the Johnson Amendment entirely for all nonprofits, but the recent filing represents a narrower request: preventing the federal government from enforcing the rule against the parties involved in the case. The IRS and plaintiffs signed the document jointly, signaling a rare alignment on an issue that has long been a flashpoint in debates over religion and politics.
The Johnson Amendment: A Controversial Legacy
Named after then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson, the Johnson Amendment has for decades served as a legal boundary keeping tax-exempt organizations — including churches — out of overt political campaigning. The rule was designed to ensure that government-subsidized nonprofits do not become tools of partisan political activity.
However, critics, particularly from religious and conservative circles, have long argued that the law has a chilling effect on free religious expression. President Donald Trump made repealing the Johnson Amendment a campaign promise during his 2016 run, though he never succeeded in overturning it legislatively.
In practice, enforcement of the rule has been sporadic. Despite periodic high-profile violations, the IRS has rarely taken action against churches, leading some experts to describe the rule as “symbolic but toothless.” Monday’s filing may formalize what has long been an unofficial hands-off approach, especially when it comes to church-based endorsements directed solely at congregants.
Blurring the Line Between Faith and Politics
The IRS’s revised interpretation opens the door for pastors, priests, rabbis, and imams to speak more freely about candidates from the pulpit — so long as they stay within their religious context and established modes of communication.
What remains unclear is how far this exemption will stretch. Legal experts warn that the rise of livestreamed services, email newsletters, and social media posts may blur the line between “internal” and “public” communication.
“This ruling creates a gray zone,” said Dr. Meredith Klein, a legal scholar at the University of Chicago. “If a sermon is livestreamed on YouTube and includes a political endorsement, is that still an internal communication? The courts may have to weigh in soon.”
A Potential Shift in Political Mobilization
Political operatives in both parties are likely to watch the development closely. With religious Americans — particularly white Evangelicals and Mormons — historically skewing Republican, conservatives may benefit more in the short term. However, Democrats may see an opportunity to mobilize traditionally underrepresented faith groups, including Black Protestants and liberal-leaning Catholics.
“Faith communities are often highly organized and deeply influential,” said political strategist Carla Mendoza. “This shift could turn churches into new frontiers for voter registration, education, and get-out-the-vote efforts.”
Data from Pew Research underscores the connection between religiosity and political preference: highly religious white Americans are overwhelmingly Republican, while Jews, Black Protestants, and the religiously unaffiliated lean heavily Democratic.
What Comes Next
The federal judge overseeing the case has not yet ruled on the joint request, but if granted, it would further cement the IRS’s non-enforcement stance and likely shape how churches approach political speech heading into the 2026 midterm elections and beyond.
While some celebrate the ruling as a win for religious freedom, others caution that the move threatens the traditional separation of church and state — a cornerstone of American constitutional governance.
“The problem isn’t pastors talking politics,” said Rev. James Cole, a progressive minister in New York. “It’s when government starts subsidizing that speech with tax exemptions. That’s where things get murky — and dangerous.”
