WASHINGTON - The Internal Revenue Service and a coalition of religious broadcasters and churches have jointly asked a federal court in Texas to approve a proposed consent judgment that would reverse the long-standing prohibition on religious organizations to endorse political platforms or candidates.

Backers say the proposal would clarify and limit how the Johnson Amendment applies to political speech by churches. The proposed order, filed Monday, aims to resolve a lawsuit challenging the decades-old provision of the tax code.

The Johnson Amendment, part of the Internal Revenue Code, requires tax-exempt nonprofit organizations, including churches, to refrain from participating in or intervening in political campaigns for public office.

Plaintiffs National Religious Broadcasters, Intercessors for America, Sand Springs Church and First Baptist Church Waskom sued the IRS last year, alleging the amendment violated their First Amendment rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion.

Under the proposed consent judgment, which awaits action by the court, a house of worship would not be considered to be "participating" or "intervening" in a political campaign if it "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."

The parties, including IRS Commissioner Billy Long, argue this interpretation aligns with the ordinary meaning of the words "participate" and "intervene," and that such communications are akin to a family discussion. They assert that the IRS has generally not enforced the Johnson Amendment against houses of worship for this type of speech during worship services.

If approved, the proposed order would permanently prevent the IRS from enforcing the Johnson Amendment against the plaintiff churches based on these specific types of communications.

However, the National Council of Nonprofits strongly criticized the proposed agreement. In a statement issued Monday, Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits, called the court filing "deeply concerning," saying it "furthers an assault on the bedrock principle that charitable organizations must remain nonpartisan in law, fact, and purpose in order to serve their missions and communities."

Yentel contended that the action "is not about religion or free speech, but about radically altering campaign finance laws." She warned that the proposed decree could "open the floodgates for political operatives to funnel money to their preferred candidates while receiving generous tax breaks at the expense of taxpayers who may not share those views."

The National Council of Nonprofits emphasized the Johnson Amendment's nearly 70-year history in preserving public trust and protecting charitable institutions from partisan pressure. The organization noted that a large majority of nonprofit, faith, philanthropic and public service communities support the amendment, citing polling data showing public backing for the policy.