A federal judge in Texas has dismissed a lawsuit that would have allowed churches to endorse political candidates without losing their tax-exempt status.
The case, which challenged the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 law that prohibits 501(c)(3) nonprofits from endorsing political candidates, was filed in August 2024 by the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB), two Texas churches, and Intercessors for America.
The plaintiffs argued that the Johnson Amendment violates the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, is unconstitutionally vague under the Fifth Amendment, and infringes on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The U.S. Department of Justice attempted to dismiss the case in the last weeks of the Biden administration.
After President Trump took office in January 2025, however, his administration revived the case.
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and U.S. Department of Justice shifted their positions and sided with the plaintiffs, arguing that the Johnson Amendment should be read narrowly when applied to churches.
Last summer, the IRS surprised some observers by agreeing to settle, reversing the 70-year ban prohibiting nonprofits from engaging in political campaigns.
On July 7, 2025, the government and plaintiffs filed a joint motion for entry of a consent judgment that would have allowed houses of worship to address electoral politics from the pulpit when framed in the context of religious faith and moral teaching and without risking loss of their tax-exempt status.
In an opinion issued March 31, however, U.S. District Judge J. Campbell Barker ruled that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to approve the proposed consent judgment between the plaintiffs and the IRS or to grant the requested relief.
The case was dismissed without prejudice. Barker, a Trump appointee and former deputy solicitor general of Texas, said the plaintiffs could challenge the issue in other ways. They could sue after paying taxes or after their loss of tax-exempt status as a result of violating the Johnson Amendment.
The judge cited the Tax Anti-Injunction Act and restrictions in the Declaratory Judgment Act, which generally prohibit federal courts from issuing orders that would restrain the assessment or collection of taxes — including challenges to the conditions for maintaining 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status.
In the context of the Trump administration’s support of last summer’s settlement, NRB General Counsel Michael Farris said the organization was surprised by the ruling and plans to appeal to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
“President Donald J. Trump has repeatedly cited this case’s settlement as a victory by his administration for religious freedom,” he said.
“The plaintiffs here have no other forum to challenge the free speech restrictions imposed by the Johnson Amendment’s limitation on the right of nonprofits to speak about candidates, unless they first violate the law and then become subject to IRS enforcement action. No person should be forced to place themselves in legal jeopardy to protect their constitutional rights,” Farris emphasized, saying the U.S. Supreme Court “has backed this conclusion on numerous occasions.”
The USCCB’s response
Last summer’s proposed settlement prompted an immediate reaction from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). On July 8, 2025, USCCB spokesperson Chieko Noguchi, executive director of public affairs, indicated that the Church would not, in any case, support or oppose political candidates.
“It doesn’t change how the Catholic Church engages in public debate,” Noguchi said at the time. “The Church seeks to help Catholics form their conscience in the Gospel so they might discern which candidates and policies would advance the common good. The Catholic Church maintains its stance of not endorsing or opposing political candidates.”
The March 31 ruling leaves the provision intact for now, at least as enforced through the tax code.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.