Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) have asked the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to investigate a Nevada church for a possible endorsement of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. According to the AU press release, "Obama spoke during services at the Pentecostal Temple Church of God in Christ in Las Vegas on Jan. 13 in what the Las Vegas Review-Journal described as a 'surprise appearance.'" A blog posting from mydd.com discusses the event. Reportedly, the pastor of the church said, "if you can't support your own, you won't get anywhere." Does this amount to an explicit endorsement?

In an open letter printed in the Wall Street Journal, Pastor Taylor of Calvary Assembly of God in Algoma, Wisconsin challenges the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to investigate his church and a November 2006 sermon for possible campaign intervention. The letter in the Wall Street Journal was paid for by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, an interfaith, public-interest law firm. The Becket Fund's National Litigation Director Eric was quoted in BNA Money and Politics ($$) saying his law firm is basing its defense on the church autonomy doctrine that prohibits states from interfering with the way a church is governed.

They charge that the IRS is misinterpreting federal tax law to censor sermons about political figures and political issues. Under IRS rules, churches are not allowed to explicitly or implicitly endorse particular candidates for political office without risking their tax-exempt status, but the Becket Fund press release asserts that "clergy speaking to their congregations is not the same as a church, as a legal entity, endorsing a candidate."

The letter references the recent All Saints Episcopal Church case that ended without the church losing it tax-exempt status despite the IRS stating that they did in fact intervene in the campaign. "But now you've all but admitted that you can't enforce these rules against the All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, California. We're happy to see that, after some hemming and hawing, you finally dropped your offensive investigation into that church."

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has responded, considering the letter "mocks the IRS and dares the federal agency to investigate his church for a supposedly political sermon he delivered in 2006. . . . the ad is based on inaccurate information and could lead unwary religious groups to violate federal tax law, encounter fines and lose their tax exemptions." And in response to the Becket Fund's allegation that the IRS will not enforce the rules, AU cites examples of IRS enforcement including weak ones such as written warnings from the IRS about political activity in 2004 and 2006.