ACLJ's Decades-Long Fight Leads to IRS Recognizing Churches' First Amendment Rights To Speak About Political Issues and Candidates From the Pulpit

After the ACLJ and other like-minded organizations’ relentless legal pressure, the IRS has surrendered, officially admitting that silencing churches violates the Constitution. The IRS announced that churches can endorse political candidates to their congregations without risking the loss of their tax-exempt status. This represents a complete vindication of the legal positions the ACLJ has championed for decades – the culmination of a long legal battle.

The ACLJ has consistently argued that the Johnson Amendment, when applied to churches, violates the First Amendment’s protections for religious speech and the free exercise of religion. This new announcement by the IRS proves that our constitutional analysis was correct all along and constitutes a major victory for the First Amendment.

The IRS’s Stunning Legal Concessions

The IRS’s complete reversal came through a landmark consent judgment filed in U. S. District Court in National Religious Broadcasters, et al. v. Billy Long, IRS Commissioner. This joint motion reveals the extraordinary scope of the IRS’s capitulation to constitutional pressure. In the consent judgment, the IRS made several remarkable admissions that vindicate the ACLJ’s long-standing constitutional arguments.

The IRS conceded that churches speaking to their congregations do not “participate” or “intervene” in political campaigns within the ordinary meaning of those words. The government acknowledged:

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 IRS admitted it has generally not enforced the Johnson Amendment against churches for electoral speech during worship services. The Consent Decree states that this “interpretation of the Johnson Amendment is in keeping with the IRS’s treatment of the Johnson Amendment in practice,” as it “has not enforced the Johnson Amendment against houses of worship for speech concerning electoral politics in the context of worship services.” This confirms what the ACLJ has long argued about the selective and inconsistent enforcement that created an unconstitutional chilling effect.

Most significantly, the IRS agreed that applying the Johnson Amendment to church speech would create “serious tension” with the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. The government acknowledged:

Interpreting the Johnson Amendment to reach such communications would create serious tension with the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause: That broad interpretation would treat religions that do not speak directly to matters of electoral politics more favorably than religions that do so—favoring some religions over others based on their speech to their own congregations in connection with religious services through customary channels of worship and religious communication.

The Scope of the IRS’s Surrender

The consent judgment establishes that “the Johnson Amendment does not reach speech by a house of worship to its congregation, in connection with religious services through its customary channels of communication on matters of faith, concerning electoral politics viewed through the lens of religious faith.”

How ACLJ’s Advocacy Made This Victory Possible

For years, the ACLJ has been a leading voice challenging the IRS’s unconstitutional enforcement of the Johnson Amendment against religious institutions. We have consistently argued that the Johnson Amendment threatened an unconstitutional infringement on churches’ religious freedoms.

Back in 2011, ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow argued against the amendment:

On one hand, the IRS says it’s permissible for religious leaders to discuss important issues of public policy (as they should), but are prohibited from supporting or opposing a candidate who takes positions on those issues. That’s absurd. The prohibition makes no sense and has far-reaching implications. It censors pastors in the pulpit. And it turns the IRS, which was originally designed to collect revenue for the general treasury, into the speech police.

Religious leaders not only have a constitutional right to address the moral issues of the day, many believe they have a responsibility to do so. And, pastors should have the ability to speak out from the pulpit and support or oppose a political candidate based on where the candidate stands on the issues.

The state should allow the church to speak the truth, and instead of silencing unpopular opinions, it should let the free market of ideas decide who wins.

The IRS’s new position finally acknowledges what the ACLJ has argued for decades: Banning churches from political endorsements creates “serious tension” with the First Amendment. This wasn’t an accident – it was the direct result of ACLJ’s sustained legal pressure and advocacy. The IRS now correctly compares religious institutions’ endorsement of candidates to a “family discussion” and recognizes that “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 agency’s recognition that “[f]or many houses of worship, the exercise of their religious beliefs includes teaching or instructing their congregations” on matters of moral and political importance directly mirrors arguments the ACLJ has made for years. Our legal team has consistently maintained that the First Amendment protects both the free exercise of religion and freedom of speech. When the government attempts to condition tax benefits on surrendering these rights, it violates the Constitution. The IRS’s announcement is a complete vindication of this legal theory.

The ACLJ has been at the forefront of defending religious liberty for decades. We have consistently argued that the Johnson Amendment, as applied to churches, violates the First Amendment’s protections for religious speech and the free exercise of religion.

The ACLJ is proud to have represented one of the only churches to face tax revocation pursuant to the unconstitutional Johnson Amendment in Branch Ministries v. Rossotti. That decision represents a chilling precedent that reinforced fears of tax exemption loss, fears which silenced churches and religious organizations from speaking prophetically to moral issues during election seasons. It demonstrated how the government can weaponize tax policy to suppress religious speech and coerce churches into abandoning their prophetic calling to address the moral issues of our time. The ACLJ stood firm on the conviction that the First Amendment prevented the government from telling churches how to operate. Those arguments have now, after years of legal battle, found recognition by the IRS.

Our legal team has worked tirelessly to challenge unconstitutional restrictions on religious expression, and we applaud this recognition of churches’ fundamental rights. This victory represents years of advocacy and legal challenges to government overreach.

A Long-Overdue Correction

The IRS has generally not enforced the Johnson Amendment against houses of worship for speech related to electoral politics. This inconsistent enforcement has created a chilling effect, where pastors and religious leaders have self-censored rather than risk their church’s tax-exempt status.

Thanks to the ACLJ’s advocacy, pastors can now speak freely from the pulpit about political candidates without fear of IRS retaliation. Churches can exercise their religious convictions by endorsing to their members candidates who align with their biblical values and moral principles.

This freedom represents the practical implementation of constitutional principles that the ACLJ has defended in courtrooms nationwide. Churches and pastors no longer have to choose between their First Amendment rights and their church’s tax-exempt status. This development means that pastors can now speak freely from the pulpit about political candidates without fear of IRS retaliation. Churches can exercise their religious convictions by endorsing candidates who align with their biblical values and moral principles.

This decision represents more than just a policy change – it’s the culmination of the ACLJ’s decades-long fight to protect religious institutions from government attempts to silence their voices. The ACLJ proved that religious freedom and the separation of church and state do not require the silencing of religious voices in the public square.

Looking Forward: The ACLJ’s Continued Mission

This decision represents more than just a policy change – it’s a recognition that the Constitution protects religious institutions from government attempts to silence their voices. We will build on this victory to secure even greater protections for people of faith, ensuring that government overreach can never again silence the church.

The First Amendment doesn’t become null and void when churches receive tax-exempt status. Religious freedom and the separation of church and state do not require the silencing of religious voices in the public square. Today’s announcement is a victory for the Constitution, religious liberty, and the fundamental principle that in America, the government cannot condition benefits on the surrender of constitutional rights.

This is how the First Amendment was always meant to work – protecting religious expression, not silencing it.

The IRS’s consent decree has not yet been approved and entered by the judge. We will continue to monitor this development and provide updates as the legal landscape in this area becomes clearer. But one thing is for sure: The shackles are being taken off pastors and churches to speak the truth about issues, policies, and politicians from a religious perspective, and that’s a good thing.