A Trump-appointed federal judge just blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to let churches endorse political candidates without losing tax-exempt status, delivering a stunning procedural defeat that leaves conservative congregations stuck under a 1954 regulation many view as an unconstitutional gag order on religious speech.
Trump Judge Blocks Trump Administration Deal
Judge J. Campbell Barker issued his March 31, 2026 ruling in Tyler, Texas, dismissing a lawsuit filed by the National Religious Broadcasters and two Texas churches against the IRS. The case challenged the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits 501(c)(3) organizations from endorsing political candidates. The Trump administration’s IRS had negotiated a settlement in July 2025 exempting “traditional religious communications” from enforcement, effectively allowing pastors to endorse candidates from the pulpit without jeopardizing their churches’ tax-exempt status. Barker ruled he lacked jurisdiction under federal tax law to approve the deal, siding with secular intervenors who opposed weakening church-state separation.
The Internal Revenue Service will maintain a policy barring pastors and churches from endorsing political candidates following a surprise ruling in a high-stakes court battle. https://t.co/3odCurgd4a
— Gene Bryant (@GeneBryant2) April 1, 2026
Constitutional Clash Over Pulpit Politics
The Johnson Amendment has stood since 1954, when then-Senator Lyndon Johnson inserted language barring tax-exempt nonprofits from campaign activity. Conservative religious groups have long argued the restriction violates pastors’ First Amendment rights to preach freely on moral and political issues, including candidate fitness. The National Religious Broadcasters filed suit before the 2024 presidential election, contending the amendment unconstitutionally restricts religious speech in congregational settings. Trump’s 2017 executive order directed lax enforcement, but the law remained unchanged. This settlement represented the first major IRS concession on the issue through a consent judgment, creating a carve-out for sermons and religious broadcasts rather than full repeal.
Jurisdictional Roadblock Derails Settlement
Barker determined the Tax Anti-Injunction Act stripped his court of authority to hear the case because the plaintiffs sought to prevent IRS tax collection actions before they occurred. The judge noted enforcement relief “directly bears on tax collection,” triggering statutory barriers to preemptive lawsuits. He suggested alternative legal paths, such as churches paying taxes then suing for refunds to challenge the amendment’s constitutionality. Americans United for Separation of Church and State successfully intervened to oppose the settlement, with President Rachel Laser celebrating that the “Johnson Amendment remains a strong bulwark” against what she called religious extremists exploiting houses of worship for political campaigning.
National Religious Broadcasters General Counsel Michael Farris countered that Barker’s ruling ignored exemptions to the Anti-Injunction Act that should allow their challenge to proceed. The organization announced immediate appeal plans to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing the procedural dismissal sidesteps the core constitutional question. The IRS has remained silent following the ruling, leaving unclear whether the Trump administration will continue defending the settlement on appeal or pivot to other strategies for regulatory relief.
What This Means for Conservative Congregations
Churches now face continued uncertainty about political speech from the pulpit heading into future election cycles. While the IRS has rarely enforced the Johnson Amendment—no church has lost tax-exempt status for endorsements since annual “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” protests began in 2008—the law’s existence creates a chilling effect on pastoral speech. Conservative congregations frustrated by leftist overreach on other fronts now find their own administration’s effort to expand religious liberty stymied by procedural technicalities. The ruling reinforces that backdoor regulatory settlements cannot circumvent statutory tax law, forcing religious freedom advocates back to Congress or riskier litigation strategies that may take years to resolve.
The decision also highlights broader tensions within the conservative movement about government power and constitutional limits. Some MAGA supporters question whether allowing tax-subsidized political endorsements could backfire if liberal churches exploit the same exemption, while others see any restriction on religious speech as government overreach incompatible with the First Amendment. The case underscores how even sympathetic judges appointed by Trump will enforce statutory constraints when jurisdictional rules demand it, regardless of political alignment. For pastors who believe moral leadership requires speaking plainly about candidate character and policy positions, the status quo remains: endorse at your congregation’s financial peril.
Sources:
US judge declines IRS settlement churches endorse candidates – The Daily Record
Judge Blocks IRS Pact to Allow Church Political Endorsements – National Today
Texas judge rejects push to let churches make political endorsements – Texas Tribune