The IRS made clear its stance on churches endorsing political candidates in front of their congregations, saying in a court filing on Monday that houses of worship are free to push political candidates from the pulpit without fear of losing their tax-exempt status.

The IRS clarification came in a lawsuit court filing after two Texas churches and an association of Christian broadcasters sued, seeking an exemption from the ban on churches endorsing political candidates, The New York Times reported. While the plaintiffs sought a carve-out for all nonprofits, the IRS agreed in a court filing to allow churches to endorse candidates without penalty.

According to the IRS, the Johnson Amendment — which has been part of the U.S. tax code since 1954 — does not prohibit a church from communicating with its congregants about its preferred political candidates, comparing such endorsements to “a family discussion concerning candidates.”

“Thus, communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted,” the agency wrote in the court filing.

The IRS added that it has long refrained from enforcing the Johnson Amendment against churches “for speech concerning electoral politics in the context of worship services.” For several years, pastors from around the country organized to test the tax code during “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” The Washington Post reported. The IRS only launched one investigation stemming from “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” and the agency did not punish any churches.

The IRS statement will be celebrated by many conservative Christians who have long viewed the prohibition on political endorsements as infringing upon their free speech.

During his first term, President Donald Trump stated that he wanted to “totally destroy” the Johnson Amendment, which was introduced by then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson (D-TX) in 1954.

“I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution,” Trump told Christians at the National Prayer Breakfast in 2017. “I will do that, remember.”

For the Johnson Amendment to be repealed, Congress would have to take action.

Proponents of the Johnson Amendment argue that the tax code is essential for guarding campaign finance laws. If the Johnson Amendment were repealed, some worry that political contributions could be funneled through tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organizations, and the contributions could remain undisclosed and tax-deductible.

The Trump administration is moving to end the requirement that passengers remove their shoes when going through airport security, according to multiple reports.

The much-hated shoe removal mandate, which has been in place since 2006, is being gradually phased out in the coming weeks, according to Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents who have told multiple news outlets. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the news on Tuesday morning. 

The phase-out began at Baltimore/Washington International Airport, Fort Lauderdale International Airport, Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, Portland International Airport, Philadelphia International Airport, and Piedmont Triad International Airport in North Carolina, CBS News reported. 

On Tuesday morning, Leavitt posted, “Big news from [the Department of Homeland Security]!” in response to an X news post on the policy change. 

Big news from @DHSgov! ✈️👟 https://t.co/GJjd2UQMki

— Karoline Leavitt (@PressSec) July 8, 2025

“TSA and DHS are always exploring new and innovative ways to enhance the passenger experience and our strong security posture,” a TSA spokesman told the New York Times on Monday. “Any potential updates to our security process will be issued through official channels.”

The news was first reported by Gate Access on July 4, which stated that the TSA had begun circulating the updated shoe guidance. Before the change, visitors enrolled in the TSA PreCheck program were permitted to keep their shoes, belts, and jackets on and were not required to remove laptops or liquids from their bags. 

Some conservative commentators praised the move from the Trump administration.

“Rejoice, you no longer have to take your shoes off to go through TSA airport security. Always a moronic rule that didn’t seem likely to make any of us safer. But this removal is likely to make airport security lines run way smoother,”  Outkick founder Clay Travis said.

In December 2001, a month after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, airline passenger Richard Reid attempted to ignite explosive devices hidden in his shoes while on a flight from Paris to Miami. Still considered a threat years later, the shoe removal policy was first instituted in 2006 as a way to screen airline passengers for explosives.

Reid, known as the shoe bomber, had homemade bombs containing 10 ounces of explosive materials hidden in his shoes that the FBI said would have blown a hole in the plane’s fuselage if detonated successfully. After pleading guilty to eight terrorism-related charges, Reid was sentenced to life in prison.