Judge Blocks Churches' Tax-Exempt Political Endorsement Deal

The lawsuit, brought by several Texas churches and national Christian groups, challenged the 1954 Johnson Amendment, arguing it violated their First Amendment rights by prohibiting electioneering from the pulpit. The Trump administration had sided with the plaintiffs, seeking a deal where the IRS would not enforce the amendment against these churches, a reversal from the Biden administration's earlier attempt to dismiss the case.

District Judge Cam Barker, a Trump appointee, ruled he lacked the authority to approve the consent judgment, citing federal laws that prevent judges from blocking taxation that has not yet occurred. Barker stated that plaintiffs must typically pay the challenged taxes and then sue for a refund, confirming this was not the proper venue for such relief.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State lauded the ruling, with President Rachel Laser stating it maintains a "strong bulwark" against religious extremists exploiting houses of worship. The group also noted the proposed settlement would have been unfair by exempting only houses of worship and not secular nonprofits.

While some conservative Christian pastors had already begun touting victory, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops maintained its stance against candidate endorsements. Enforcement of the Johnson Amendment has historically been lax, with the Texas Tribune and ProPublica identifying at least 20 violations over a two-year period, exceeding the IRS's investigations in the prior decade.