Key Findings
- Tax-exempt nonprofits, including Islamist organizations tied to foreign extremist movements, are openly electioneering—endorsing candidates, soliciting campaign donations, distributing campaign literature, hosting campaign booths, and campaigning from the pulpit—all actions that potentially violate the Johnson Amendment’s absolute ban on political campaign intervention by 501(c)(3) organizations.
- The clearest case is Abdul El-Sayed’s razor-thin margin in the 2026 Michigan Democratic Senate primary, where imams at Michigan mosques campaigned for him from the pulpit—two of them hosting the candidate himself during services.
- Weeks later, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) gave El-Sayed the stage at its convention while his campaign worked a booth on the floor, soliciting donations and volunteers. ISNA’s convention program included El-Sayed’s campaign messaging.
- Support for El-Sayed was often implicit: imams invoked “the Zionists” and “AIPAC” to refer to his opponents; the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) implored Michigan Muslims to “make history” with their votes; and ISNA’s CEO told his audience that Muslims “know exactly what decision they should take” after El-Sayed spoke.
- The conduct maps onto the IRS’s own training examples. The Bergen Diyanet Mosque Cultural Center solicited campaign donations and reposted candidate literature on its social media, and the Pakistani American Skilled Women Organization endorsed a candidate in the institutional first person.
- Others handed candidates the pulpit itself, often without clear indication of an equal-time offer to opponents: two Democratic primary candidates at a New York mosque in the space of 10 weeks, and El-Sayed at two Michigan mosques in 2026.
- CAIR published editorialized congressional voting records only in federal election years from 2018 to 2024, not in the off years, a timing pattern that the IRS treats as a marker of election intervention. Its “2026 Strategic Election Plan” promises more.
- Several of the actors are tied to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Republic of Türkiye, or the Muslim Brotherhood.
- Enforcement is nearly nonexistent.
Updated September 25, 2026. Responses received after publication appear at the end of this article.
Tax-exempt nonprofits linked to foreign governments, including an adversary and state sponsor of terrorism, are actively intervening in critical U.S. elections in apparent violation of federal tax law. These organizations endorse candidates and campaign for them openly—from the pulpit, in some cases framing voting for a preferred candidate as a religious obligation—and they do it to advance an Islamist agenda opposed to the democratic values they exploit.
A prime example is Abdul El-Sayed’s campaign for Michigan’s U.S. Senate seat. Most recently, over Labor Day weekend 2026, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) [EIN: 31-1054012] let El-Sayed’s campaign staff wave campaign posters and distribute campaign literature at its convention in Detroit. ISNA’s CEO, Azhar Azeez, praised and embraced El-Sayed on stage before the candidate spoke. After the candidate’s campaign speech, Azeez told the audience that the Muslim community is “very smart, very wise” and “they know exactly what decision they should take.”
El-Sayed, for whom Islamists campaigned heavily in the lead-up to the August 4 Michigan Democratic Senate primary using tax-exempt organizations, defeated Haley Stevens by a margin of less than one percent. His lead of 13,792 votes came on the heels of extensive electioneering in Michigan mosques. Numerous imams and the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) [EIN: 77-0646756] gave sermons addressing the primary election inside mosques, in potential violation of the Internal Revenue Code; one imam, deeply tied to the Islamic Republic of Iran, preached that voting is “as wajib [religiously required] as prayer.”
That radical imam was not an outlier. The day before the primary, Imam Husham Al-Husainy preached that an El-Sayed victory would be a “victory to God” after calling for the defeat of “the Zionist lowlives” and adding that “the infidels hate” the “perfecting of God’s light.” Al-Husainy delivered that sermon at his mosque in Dearborn, Michigan, the Karbalaa Islamic Educational Center [EIN: 82-3188942], which files with the IRS as Karbala Islamic Society of America Inc. Days earlier, at the Muslim Educational Community Center of America (MECCA) [EIN: 88-0774199] in Canton, Sayed Mohammed Qazwini told worshippers, “it’s mandatory to go and to elect brother Abdul El-Sayed because at least we know he’s a Muslim, he will support Muslim issues here in this country.” Each imam was preaching at a tax-exempt mosque.
According to the IRS, “all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.” However, the IRS has rarely revoked an organization’s tax-exempt status for campaign intervention. The limited available data show that only a handful of religious organizations, including two churches (per IRS testimony to Congress in 2002), have lost their status for campaign intervention. The most recent IRS data on “Political Activities Compliance Initiative” (PACI) allegations show that seven unspecified organizations lost their tax-exempt status in the 2000s. This prohibition, introduced in 1954 by then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson and known as the Johnson Amendment, has withstood legal challenge for seven decades. In July 2025, the IRS proposed settling a Texas lawsuit by agreeing that certain communications by houses of worship to their congregations about electoral politics would not count as campaign intervention. But in March 2026, the judge dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds. An appeal is planned, and the Treasury issued a statement that it would “provide additional clarity and guidance.”
“[I]t’s mandatory to go and to elect brother Abdul El-Sayed because at least we know he’s a Muslim …”
Islamist electioneering for El-Sayed is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many examples of Islamist groups apparently violating IRS rules governing the tax-exempt status that they enjoy.
The rules are clear, and the IRS has published a 16-minute online course: “Political Campaigns and Charities: The Ban on Political Campaign Intervention Course.” Measured against it, the catalog of electioneering documented below highlights the very acts the IRS uses as textbook illustrations—with no apparent consequences for any organization.
The Basics: Money, Endorsements, Literature
The IRS course begins with the most elementary prohibitions. A nonprofit engages in prohibited political campaign intervention when it does any of the following: “Makes or solicits contributions to or for candidates or political organizations; endorses a candidate or rates the candidates (no matter how objective such rating may be); publishes or distributes partisan campaign literature or written statements; has its representatives speak out about a candidate; or uses its resources to influence an election. All of these activities are prohibited.” No balancing test applies, and no disclaimer cures the violation, though the ultimate determination depends on “all the facts and circumstances.”
In the example below, most of these lines were crossed in a single step.
In 2021, the Bergen Diyanet Mosque Cultural Center published an appeal, in Turkish, on its Facebook page: “US congressional candidate Tayfun Selen seeks our support! Let’s support Tayfun Selen’s campaign in order to make our voice heard stronger on behalf of the Turkish Muslim community in America!” The mosque’s post provided a link to donate to Selen’s campaign, as well as campaign materials. It solicited contributions, implicitly endorsed a candidate, published campaign literature, and used the institution’s own official channel—actions that appear to breach most of the IRS’s basic rules in just one post.
The Bergen Diyanet Mosque Cultural Center, a branch of the Turkish-American Religious Foundation, supported a candidate, solicited contributions, and distributed campaign literature on his behalf in 2021. (BDMCC/Facebook)
The Bergen Diyanet Mosque Cultural Center, a branch of the Turkish-American Religious Foundation, supported a candidate, solicited contributions, and distributed campaign literature on his behalf in 2021. (BDMCC/Facebook)
The Bergen Diyanet Mosque Cultural Center, a branch of the Turkish-American Religious Foundation, supported a candidate, solicited contributions, and distributed campaign literature on his behalf in 2021. (BDMCC/Facebook)
Located in Cliffside Park, New Jersey, the Diyanet Mosque of Bergen, as it is also known, is a branch of the Turkish-American Religious Foundation (TARF) [EIN: 13-4194912]. Asked about the post, TARF said that it “maintains an absolute policy prohibiting political campaign intervention or candidate endorsements,” adding: “All of TARF’s branches are required to uphold these standards, and we consistently monitor our digital presence to ensure full regulatory compliance.”
The Presidency of Religious Affairs (Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı or “Diyanet” for short), a Turkish state institution overseen by the Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP) government, pledged $300,000 toward building the mosque. TARF is based in Lanham, Maryland, next door to the Diyanet Center of America (DCA), whose construction was funded by Diyanet. TARF refers to DCA as “our complex” and “The Projection of the Turkish-Islamic Civilization Vision in the USA.” According to Abdullah Bozkurt in Nordic Monitor, Turkish intelligence screens Diyanet’s overseas imams, who then receive “comprehensive training and direction prior to their departure.” TARF “categorically rejects any unsubstantiated claims or external reports suggesting that our religious staff engages in any activities outside of lawful religious duties, peaceful worship and community service.”
Nor is the practice confined to Facebook. As Benjamin Baird reported in Focus on Western Islamism (FWI), the founder and former chairman of the Pakistani American Skilled Women Organization (PASWO), Atia Shahnaz, endorsed Eric Adams for mayor of New York City at a fundraising dinner in May 2021. At the time, PASWO was a 501(c)(3) organization [EIN: 85-0869897]; earlier this year, the IRS revoked its status for “not filing a Form 990-series return or notice for three consecutive years,” but its present status is unclear. Shahnaz made PASWO’s endorsement in the institutional first person: “Our vote is going to be Eric Adams.” Not a personal preference offered in a private capacity, but a collective declaration made in the organization’s voice, at its own event. Though PASWO itself is not necessarily Islamist, its former chairman joined a Facebook group for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, Pakistan’s populist Islamist political party, and PASWO has in the past partnered with the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), described by Congress as Jamaat-e-Islami’s U.S. affiliate.
The Muslim American Society (MAS) has done the same at the local level. In a 2023 newsletter, the Washington, D.C., chapter of MAS [EIN: 45-3937445] urged readers to take part in the Fairfax County School Board race and then directed them to “the 2023 Non-Partisan Endorsement by the Fairfax County Democratic Committee.” Virginia school board races are formally nonpartisan, and the county’s Democratic Party labels its slate accordingly—but a party committee conducts the vote, and it is not the election. It determines whom the party will endorse in November. Encouraging turnout is permitted; steering members into a party’s candidate-selection process is something entirely different and potentially prohibited.
MAS was, according to federal prosecutors, “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America,” and its D.C. chapter’s executive director at the time of the 2023 newsletter, Tamer Ammar, posted publicly on Facebook in 2017, writing fondly about the mosque in Egypt where he was raised, that it was “where we came to know Qutb, al-Banna, Azzam and Hawwa”—Sayyid Qutb, the Brotherhood’s best-known ideologue; Hassan al-Banna, its founder; Abdullah Azzam, a mentor of Osama bin Laden; and Saʿid Hawwa, a Syrian Brotherhood leader who held that God ordained Islamists to govern by whatever means necessary.
Turning the Pulpit into a Campaign Stop
On several occasions, Islamist nonprofits have gone a step further by hosting candidates in their mosques. The IRS does not forbid nonprofits from hosting candidates, but it sets clear rules. The IRS course says a charity that invites a candidate to speak as a candidate “is engaging in political campaign intervention unless it gives all qualified candidates an equal opportunity to speak” and “must make it clear that it neither supports nor opposes the invitee’s candidacy.” The IRS Tax Guide for Churches & Religious Organizations adds that neutrality “should be stated explicitly when the candidate is introduced and in communications concerning the candidate’s appearance.” Whether a charity “maintains a nonpartisan atmosphere” is one of the “factors in determining whether the organization participated or intervened in a political campaign.” If a candidate attends a charity’s event in some capacity other than as a candidate, the IRS course still states that the host must ensure that “it maintains a nonpartisan atmosphere at the event.”
The Islamic Center of Passaic County (ICPC) [EIN: 22-3035949] did not ensure a “nonpartisan atmosphere” when, in November 2018, Mayor Mohamed Khairullah of Prospect Park, New Jersey, stood at its pulpit four days before an election in which he was on the ballot. The event appears in the 2021 documentary Mayor Mohamed, which follows that reelection campaign. Khairullah, a Democrat who attends the mosque, is not shown speaking, but New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy, also a Democrat, spoke beside him. The governor, introduced as “a dear friend of many of us,” said that “we’re in a place of worship, so I don’t want to get too partisan” only after he had already turned to partisan politics: “We’ve got a president who wants to divide us … we frankly had some of this in New Jersey for the past eight years, dividing one group of people against another.” After criticizing President Trump and alluding to former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, both Republicans, Murphy closed with a turnout appeal: “The election is on Tuesday … the most important thing: you must vote. We have an opportunity to send a message about not just who we are in New Jersey but who we are as Americans.”
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (right) appeared with Prospect Park Mayor Mohamed Khairullah (left)—then on the ballot for reelection—and the mosque’s imam (in the white kufi) at the Islamic Center of Passaic County, four days before the 2018 election. Murphy told those gathered: “The election is on Tuesday … you must vote.” (Mayor Mohamed/Tubi)
Nonpartisan efforts to encourage voter turnout are permitted. But a candidate stood at ICPC’s pulpit four days before his own election while a governor of his party criticized Republicans from that platform and told the congregation they must vote. Whatever else that is, it is not the nonpartisan atmosphere the IRS asks of a host. ICPC did not respond to a question about whether it had also invited the incumbent’s opponent. The mosque’s founder was convicted in 2008 of conspiring to provide material support to the designated terrorist group Hamas, and its current imam was convicted in Israel in 1993 (according to records cited by U.S. authorities) of membership in Hamas, a conviction he disputes.
The Al-Khoei Islamic Center in Queens, New York, offers more recent and sharper examples. The mosque turned its Friday prayers into a campaign stop twice in 10 weeks. The mosque and the Al-Khoei Benevolent Foundation [EIN: 13-3572658], which runs it, are named after the foundation’s founder, the Iranian-born Ayatollah Al-Khoei. The organization is part of a global network with three branches in Iran, according to WikiShia—a site affiliated with the Ahlul Bayt World Assembly, founded by the late Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khamenei. On March 8, 2026, following the death of Khamenei, the Al-Khoei Foundation’s website posted condolences from Ayatollah Sistani, praising Iran’s former leader as a “noble person,” and lauding “his unique role in the steering of the Islamic Republic over many years.”
Additionally, the Al-Khoei Foundation received a $25,000 grant from the Alavi Foundation [EIN: 23-7345978]. Under the Obama administration, federal prosecutors accused the Alavi Foundation of being controlled by the Islamic Republic of Iran, in a case that ended in March 2026 with a settlement in which Alavi admitted no wrongdoing but agreed to pay $318 million to victims of Iranian terrorism; Al-Khoei has publicly defended Alavi.
On March 6, 2026, Darializa Avila Chevalier, a Democratic primary candidate in New York’s 13th Congressional District, addressed the congregation and told worshippers that her opponent, Rep. Adriano Espaillat, was “bought by the Israeli lobby to stay silent.” On May 15, the mosque hosted Brad Lander, a Democratic primary candidate in the neighboring 10th District, who accused Israel of genocide and described himself as “a proud Jewish New Yorker,” saying that if elected he hoped to build the same partnership he has with Mayor Zohran Mamdani alongside Representatives Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. Both candidates later won.
Since the two candidates were running in separate races, the appearances would be hard to defend as a candidate forum. Al-Khoei did not respond to a question about whether it had also invited Espaillat, or any other candidate in either race, to speak there. And Avila Chevalier did not merely appear—she used a religious service to attack a sitting congressman by name.
A Convention Hall Instead of a Pulpit
Although nonprofits may host candidates, the context is decisive—and ISNA’s Detroit convention, described at the outset, is a case study in getting that context wrong. El-Sayed received what can be construed as ISNA’s support: the onstage embrace by Azeez noted above, and Azeez’s praise for him as a candidate “running now to build a government that works for regular Michiganders—not billionaires, not corporations.” After El-Sayed’s speech—while volunteers were parading campaign posters across the hall—Azeez returned to the podium to say that ISNA endorses no party or candidate and that Mike Rogers, El-Sayed’s opponent, had not replied to invitations to attend. Despite Azeez’s disclaimers, made as political campaigning was actively taking place before his very eyes, he further undercut ISNA’s purported nonpartisanship with his remarks about the Muslim community being “smart” and “wise” enough to make the right choice in the election. Azeez has since told Texas Scorecard that his remarks only implied that “[voters] would know who to vote for based on what these candidates have to offer.” The IRS treats context as part of the message—and the context was a remark delivered moments after El-Sayed’s own campaign speech, in a hall where his campaign’s posters were still circulating.
“Islamic Society of North America is a religious organization. It’s a nonprofit organization. As an organization, we don’t endorse any political party or candidate. But [the] American Muslim community is very smart, very wise. They know exactly what decision they should take.”
ISNA’s convention program makes it difficult to deny support for El-Sayed. Its “Who’s Who” entry for him states, “Abdul is running to build a government that works for regular Michiganders” after identifying him as “Michigan’s 2026 Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate.” That wording—which Azeez repeated on stage—appears, verbatim, in the candidate biography published by A New Policy PAC, which raises money for El-Sayed’s campaign. For a candidate appearing as a candidate, the IRS asks whether the host “indicates any support for or opposition to the candidate,” including in “communications concerning the candidate’s attendance,” and says its neutrality “should be stated explicitly” there. ISNA’s program did the opposite: it carried the campaign’s own message verbatim and no statement of neutrality.
“Needless to say,” according to the IRS, “no political fundraising should be allowed at the event,” but, based on FWI’s reporting from the recent convention, ISNA apparently needed reminding. Inside the convention hall, the El-Sayed campaign ran a full exhibitor booth set up to solicit donations. Beneath a step-and-repeat banner reading “ABDUL FOR US SENATE,” flanked by pull-up banners branded “Muslims for Abdul,” the table displayed “Donate Today” and “Volunteer Today” QR codes. In addition to the campaign posters in the hall when El-Sayed spoke, flyers were laid on seats and handed out by campaign staff just outside as attendees exited. The IRS says no political fundraising should be allowed at a candidate event and lists distributing partisan literature among prohibited activities; ISNA allowed both.
A campaign booth for Abdul El-Sayed over Labor Day weekend 2026 at the Huntington Place Convention Center in Detroit, the site of ISNA’s concurrent convention. To enter the event, attendees at ISNA’s convention had to pass the booth where campaign workers solicited donations, recruited volunteers, and sought political support. (FWI)
A campaign booth for Abdul El-Sayed over Labor Day weekend 2026 at the Huntington Place Convention Center in Detroit, the site of ISNA’s concurrent convention. To enter the event, attendees at ISNA’s convention had to pass the booth where campaign workers solicited donations, recruited volunteers, and sought political support. (FWI)
A campaign booth for Abdul El-Sayed over Labor Day weekend 2026 at the Huntington Place Convention Center in Detroit, the site of ISNA’s concurrent convention. To enter the event, attendees at ISNA’s convention had to pass the booth where campaign workers solicited donations, recruited volunteers, and sought political support. (FWI)
Prior to the convention, as Fox News reported, a spokeswoman from El-Sayed’s campaign had announced that “Abdul is not affiliated with and does not endorse any other participant of the conference.”
The U.S. government listed ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator and a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing case. In 2009, a federal judge, while finding that prosecutors had violated the groups’ due-process rights by naming them publicly and ordering the list sealed, declined to strike the designation, citing Brotherhood documents that list ISNA among the movement’s “organizations and the organizations of our friends” and describe it as an “apparatus” of the Brotherhood.
CAIR’s Election-Year Scorecards
The IRS course then turns to the instrument most often defended as neutral civic education: the voter guide. Tax-exempt nonprofits may publish the voting records of incumbents, but “voting records can be considered political campaign intervention if they identify any incumbent as a candidate in a campaign or compare an incumbent’s positions with those of other candidates or the charity.” The IRS adds, “This is especially so if the voting records are published simultaneously with a political campaign.” Conversely, an organization does not engage in prohibited activity if it reports “on major legislative issues that cover a wide range of subjects,” and “the publication contains no editorial opinion and its contents and structure do not imply approval or disapproval of any member or his or her voting record.”
“Nonprofits cannot engage in political activities that support one candidate or party over another…”
Potential violations of these guidelines appear in the voter guides of CAIR, which federal prosecutors named an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which prosecutors described as overseeing Hamas fundraising in the United States. In 2025, Texas Governor Greg Abbott designated CAIR “a foreign terrorist organization,” and, in 2026, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced his intent to do the same under a new state law, after a court blocked his earlier order. CAIR denies all of this and is fighting both Texas and Florida in court over the designations.
CAIR’s 2024 scorecard stated that it “evaluates the voting performance of representatives from the U.S. Congress up for reelection in the 2024 general election,” with votes “assessed positively with green … or negatively with red … based on their alignment with civil rights and social justice priorities identified by CAIR.” A color scale of approval and disapproval is editorial opinion by definition, and timing the publication with elections looks like just the sort of election intervention the IRS calls out. Its 2024 House scorecard and its 2024 Senate scorecard each carried a “Political outlook” column that expressly labeled incumbents “Up for re-election in 2024.”
This was not an isolated incident. CAIR’s 2022 Midterm Election Congressional Scorecard made clear that it “reflects the voting performance of many representatives from the U.S. Congress that are up for reelection in the 2022 midterm election,” as emphasized in its title. CAIR’s 2022 scorecard also rated votes “positively with green … or negatively with red … depending on how closely their votes on relevant legislation corresponded with civil rights and social justice priorities identified by CAIR.”
CAIR’s 2024 Senate scorecard editorialized voting records with color coding and identified incumbents up for reelection—both practices the IRS warns against. (CAIR/Google Sheets)
CAIR’s 2024 House scorecard also used color coding to editorialize voting records and identified which incumbents were up for reelection. (CAIR/Google Sheets)
CAIR’s 2022 Midterm Election Congressional Scorecard rated votes green or red based on their alignment with CAIR’s priorities. (CAIR)
CAIR’s 2020 scorecard used the same color-coded editorialization. (CAIR)
CAIR’s 2018 Congressional Voter Guide used green plus signs and red minus signs to indicate alignment with CAIR’s positions. (CAIR)
CAIR also published a scorecard in 2020 with the same style of editorialization, although it did not identify senators up for reelection that year, as well as a 2018 Congressional Voter Guide with green plus signs and red minus signs to indicate alignment with CAIR’s positions. That makes four consecutive federal election cycles of editorialized voting records. Ironically, CAIR claims neutrality through disclaimers in its scorecards. Its 2024 scorecard states, “Nonprofits cannot engage in political activities favoring one candidate or party over another,” and adds, “CAIR does not assert the favorability of one candidate over another.” CAIR printed similar statements in its 2022, 2020, and 2018 scorecards, too. Nevertheless, these disclaimers are difficult to reconcile with the clear editorialization in its scorecards. CAIR Foundation, Inc., CAIR’s 501(c)(3) entity, published the 2024 scorecard on its website, cair.com, which is listed on its 2024 tax return—not on cairaction.org, the website of CAIR Action, its 501(c)(4) arm founded in 2024, whose 2024 tax return showed “N/A” in the field for its website. The distinction between a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4) matters because only the latter “may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity.”
The timing is the tell. The IRS offers charities a way to show that their advocacy is genuine rather than electoral: “If the charity has a pattern of substantially similar advocacy during non-election periods, this is another helpful factor that indicates it is not attempting to intervene in any particular election.” CAIR’s publication record shows no such pattern. It published voting records in 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024—all federal election years—but none appear on its website for 2019, 2021, 2023, or 2025. According to CAIR, its 2026 scorecard, timed with yet another midterm election, is “coming soon.” A genuine civic-education project informs the public about legislators’ records on a continual basis. CAIR does so only before ballots are cast.
CAIR’s “2026 Strategic Election Plan” indicates that the nonprofit plans to increase its efforts with “expanded national support” for local chapters as it “extends and refines CAIR’s mobilization architecture from prior cycles” because “the stakes have never been higher.”
Code Words and the Michigan Primary
“The Zionists are pouring over 60 million dollars so they can hijack your voice. Don’t allow them.”
Per the IRS, a nonprofit “may advocate for or against a particular issue as long as that advocacy furthers its mission.” The agency clarifies, “Charities may continue to advocate issues during a political campaign,” but they “must not use advocacy as an excuse for, or to double as, political campaign intervention.” The IRS warns that a charity “risks intervening” when its message “invites the recipient to compare a candidate’s position on an issue with the organization’s own views.” Such a message “need not expressly urge a vote for or against a candidate, nor need it even mention a candidate by name.” Indeed, candidates “can be conjured up by substituting party labels or code words for names,” or “when the message concerns an issue that figures prominently in the campaign and on which the candidates hold opposing views.”
The IRS then supplies its own illustration of where the line falls. Imagine, it says, a community-development charity that advocates for mass transit, in a state senate race where one candidate favors a controversial transit project and the other opposes it. If the charity’s director speaks publicly shortly before the election and tells his audience that “there is a very important choice coming up next month,” that “you have the power to relieve the congestion and improve your quality of life,” and to “use that power when you go to the polls and cast your vote for state senator,” the IRS views that as political campaign intervention. No candidate is named, but the upcoming election is. It is a violation all the same. Substitute the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the transit project, and an Islamist nonprofit for the community-development charity, and the agency has described the 2026 Michigan Senate primary.
A case in point is Imam Hassan Qazwini’s sermon, delivered on July 31, 2026, at the Islamic Institute of America [EIN: 45-2406169] in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, as the Senate primary was underway. In a video posted by the Free Beacon, Qazwini declared it a “religious duty to go and cast your vote” before an anti-Zionist tirade: “The Zionists are pouring over 60 million dollars so they can hijack your voice. Don’t allow them. If you allow them, I would say, respectfully, I would say shame on you. And shame on me, if we allow them.” He added, “The way to deal the Zionist a bigger blow is to go and cast your vote on Tuesday, and don’t allow the Zionist candidate to win.” The imam named neither candidate and didn’t need to. El-Sayed gained attention for refusing to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, whereas his opponent, Stevens, the “pro-Israel Democrat,” was the candidate backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—the one Qazwini’s listeners would have understood him to mean.
The Islamic Institute of America had previously invited El-Sayed to speak at the grand opening ceremony of its new headquarters on June 6, 2026. The invited master of ceremonies, a local reporter, gave a glowing introduction of El-Sayed in which he not only mentioned his candidacy in the U.S. Senate race but also repeated text verbatim from his campaign website and from his candidate biography on the Detroit Regional Chamber’s website. The video is no longer available on YouTube, but FWI has retained a copy. In it, he said:
After El-Sayed’s speech, the master of ceremonies added more praise: “Throughout these five years I’ve seen Dr. Abdul El-Sayed doing some great work in Metro Detroit, and I wish him all the best for his run in [the] U.S. Senate.” There was no mention in the live stream of similar invitations to any other candidates, and the mosque did not respond to questions about the matter.
Hassan Qazwini, the Islamic Institute of America’s founder and a graduate of the Islamic seminary in Qom, Iran, has a history of lionizing the leaders of Hezbollah, Iran’s terror proxy in Lebanon. In 2025, he eulogized Hassan Nasrallah from the institute’s pulpit, saying Israel “could not and cannot eliminate his spirit, his message, or his goal.” The mosque had held a memorial service for Nasrallah in 2024. In 2010, during Qazwini’s tenure as imam of the Islamic Center of America, that mosque held a memorial service for Ayatollah Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, with whom Qazwini said he had a “special relationship,” according to The Arab American News. Fadlallah, known as the “‘godfather’ of Hezbollah,” was listed as a Specially Designated Terrorist by the U.S. government in 1995.
Saying El-Sayed’s Name Loud and Proud
Not all imams shied away from mentioning El-Sayed by name. The same day that Hassan Qazwini gave his sermon, his relative Sayed Mohammed Qazwini gave the sermon mentioned above, mandating that MECCA’s congregation “elect brother Abdul El-Sayed.” Indeed, when he said, “other candidates they are supporting Israel, they are supporting the Zionists,” the description fit Stevens, without his ever needing to name her. MECCA is a Shia center founded in 2022 by Sayed Saleh Qazwini, a graduate of the state-sponsored Islamic seminary in Qom, Iran, whose sermons have included apologia for that country’s Islamist dictatorship.
Weeks earlier, an imam at the American Muslim Diversity Association (AMDA) [EIN: 74-3193820] in Sterling Heights, Michigan, implied that congregants should vote for El-Sayed. As the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) reported, on July 17, the imam said, “So we have a lot of things coming on our side. The tide is changing. We need to take advantage of that and get involved. Abdul El-Sayed, if he gets elected, he’s going to be the first [Muslim] U.S. senator in the history of the United States.” The imam cited a voting fatwa from the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA), a body that urges American Muslims to “hate” man-made law and courts “in their hearts” and to apply Sharia “wherever possible, even by a permissible ruse.” The imam explained that AMJA’s “position is, we have to vote … they recommend to vote to serve a legitimate Islamic objective.” After referencing the “fatwa from AMJA,” he added, “I would urge that this election season—not only this election season, every election season—is becoming very, very important. So please vote.” (Incidentally, AMJA’s 2004 “Participating in Elections” fatwa declares, “It is good if some Islamists are involved in political work.”)
“Voting is as wajib [religiously required] as prayer … let us vote for Brother Abdul El-Sayed.”
June 23, 2026
∗ ∗ ∗
“I’m not telling you whom you vote for. … Who is the one that AIPAC is fighting or AIPAC is defending? You have to be careful. [The] election is coming.”
September 4, 2026
Islamic House of Wisdom
Two other Michigan Islamist imams who endorsed El-Sayed even invited him to campaign from the pulpit during services. Husham Al-Husainy, the imam who preached about giving “victory to God” against “Zionist lowlives” and “infidels,” stood with El-Sayed on August 3, 2026, before the candidate addressed congregants at the Karbalaa Islamic Educational Center. In 2022, Al-Husainy said: “Alhamdulillah … we have the Islamic Republic. They are now the light going to Lebanon, to Syria, to Iraq, to Yemen, to all over.” In 2015, he hosted a rally at the Karbalaa Islamic Educational Center, where he wished death upon Saudi Arabia and called the Saudis “agents of the Jews.” In 2006, Al-Husainy allegedly held a picture of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah at the mosque.
At the Islamic House of Wisdom (IHW) [EIN: 38-3223866] in Dearborn Heights in late June 2026, Imam Mohammad Ali Elahi, an Iranian-trained cleric who once directed the Political-Ideological Bureau of the Islamic Republic of Iran Navy, welcomed El-Sayed to his pulpit during a service. “Brother Abdul El-Sayed, welcome,” Elahi said, before declaring, “I’m going to vote for this man!” He urged his congregation to vote for the candidate to “stop Trump” and “this war against Iran,” and called the ballot “really the weapon and the power of people in this country.” Then he made voting an obligation: “So voting is as wajib [religiously required] as prayer … everybody vote and let us vote for Brother Abdul El-Sayed.” The mosque streamed the service to its more than 32,000 Facebook followers at the time; the video has been removed, but an audio recording and photos are still available. Days before the election, Elahi told his followers on social media that El-Sayed is “the best person for Michigan, the best for the U.S., the best for humanity.” Elahi’s Instagram account, where he posted the video, listed his mosque’s address and its official website in the bio—rather than a personal website—as of August 18, 2026, when this screenshot was taken. (The bio has since been changed.) Notably, he did not make clear that he was speaking in a personal capacity, as the IRS advises nonprofit officials to do.
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Photos of Abdul El-Sayed campaigning at the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, on June 23, 2026, when the imam called voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation. (IHW/Facebook)
Imam Elahi again engaged in what the IRS describes as political campaign intervention on September 4, 2026, in a sermon at IHW, apparently connecting support for El-Sayed to the interests of the Iranian regime. “The survival of [the] Islamic Republic needs really a miracle … lots of dua [prayers], and lots of work.” What might that work be? In the next breath, he connected the Islamic Republic’s survival to the upcoming midterm elections in November, stating:
After some platitudes about voting for democracy and other principles, Elahi elaborated:
As the saying goes, if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck … Elahi purported not to tell his congregation for whom they should cast their ballots, but he did declare voting for El-Sayed a religious obligation months earlier. Moreover, Elahi’s references to AIPAC and the need for a Muslim in the Senate led listeners to infer that he wanted them to vote for El-Sayed—an opponent of AIPAC and the only Muslim in Michigan’s Senate race—even if his name went unuttered. The IRS’s Tax Guide for Churches & Religious Organizations, like its training course, makes it clear that “a statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candidate’s name but also by other means such as … referring to political party affiliations or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography.”
IHW also hosted Green Party candidate Jill Stein on March 7, 2024, to speak there during her presidential campaign. The master of ceremonies, chosen by IHW to run its program, read a disclaimer that IHW had “sent an email to all Presidential candidates to speak at this event” and that the event was “not intended to promote, endorse, or support any specific political candidate or party.” He referred to the event as an “anti-genocide rally” and introduced Stein as “a very honorable guest … who has stood since October 7 against the continuing of the genocidal campaign that is taking place in Gaza.” After Elahi spoke about “genocide” in Gaza, the master of ceremonies shared that when he had previously asked himself “who do I vote for,” he “found that Green Party values matched [his] values” and emphasized the importance of “sticking with values.” Both the master of ceremonies and Elahi wore keffiyehs, Elahi’s bearing a Palestinian flag, at an event for a candidate positioned against President Biden’s Gaza policy nine days after Michigan’s “uncommitted” vote to pressure Biden to abandon support for Israel. Despite IHW’s disclaimers, the details above hardly reflect the “nonpartisan atmosphere” that the IRS asks for.
“What Did You Do for Filastin?”
On August 7, 2026, at the first Friday prayer after El-Sayed’s victory in the primary, Imam Abdelhamid Algizawi of the Muslim Community Association of Ann Arbor acknowledged that in the run-up to the primary election he had framed voting as a religious obligation and also told his congregation how to proceed. Algizawi’s mosque is listed in IRS records under the name of the school it operates, Michigan Islamic Academy [EIN: 38-2313823]. In his sermon, the imam said:
Later, the imam added commentary connecting electoral politics to the Day of Judgment:
In the context of the race for Michigan’s U.S. Senate seat, in which there is only one Muslim candidate—and Middle East policy has been so important—it’s not difficult to discern how the imam wants his congregation to vote in the general election in November 2026.
Algizawi’s public record includes praise for Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh, whom the U.S. government named a Specially Designated Global Terrorist in 2018 and who was killed in Tehran in 2024. The Free Beacon reported on September 15, 2026, that in an absentee funeral prayer in 2024, Algizawi “hail[ed] the terrorist as a ‘heroic martyr,’ ‘symbol of jihad,’ and ‘righteous man’ who ‘wanted to liberate Palestine’ and ‘sought nothing more than that.’”
At another mosque in 2022, he said: “We have a problem here in America, and most of those who are teaching Islam in the American universities, they are Jewish. So they make complication and, you know, confusion for our students, you know, and they try to bring the suspicions—bring it up, and without answer[s].” As the Free Beacon noted, “Most of the country’s leading scholars of Islam are not Jewish.”
Speaking for Themselves or for the Organization?
The IRS clearly delineates the conditions under which nonprofit officials are and aren’t allowed to engage in electioneering. The agency states, “officials are not acting in a private capacity when they endorse a candidate at charity functions,” which include mosque services. In such cases, “their actions are considered to be the actions of the charity.” For nonprofit officials to “act in a private, not an official capacity,” the IRS advises that “so as to leave no doubt, officials should make it clear that they are acting or speaking for themselves alone and not for the charity.” Elahi failed to do so in his Instagram video, as did Hassan Qazwini in a July 24 Facebook video in which he instructed Michiganders to “vote for Abdul El-Sayed because he is the most qualified person … and he is not bought by any lobbying force.”
“Our vote is going to be Eric Adams.”
Another case took place on July 24, 2026, during a sermon by CAIR’s executive director, Nihad Awad, at the Islamic Organization of North America (IONA) in Warren, Michigan. IONA is the chief U.S. outpost of Tanzeem-e-Islami, an offshoot of the South Asian Islamist organization Jamaat-e-Islami, and its imam and president has preached that Islam is meant to “prevail over the entire man-made systems and ways of life,” stressing that “whether it is liberal democracy, whether it is communism, whether it is socialism, whatever way of life invented by man, Allah’s way should prevail over that.”
As of the IRS’s mid-September 2026 data, IONA was on the Auto-Revocation List for “not filing a Form 990-series return or notice for three consecutive years.” (IONA had filed such returns through fiscal year 2022.) The IRS data show no reinstatement recorded, and IONA did not appear on the IRS’s list of organizations eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions. However, IONA’s donations page still identifies the mosque as “a 501(c)3 non-profit organization,” with its EIN [01-0808707] and a declaration that “your donation is tax-deductible.”
In its YouTube video, IONA explicitly identified Awad as “CAIR” before he delivered his get-out-the-vote sermon. While “officials acting in a private capacity may mention their association or position with the charity for the purpose of identifying themselves,” the IRS advises that “they should disclaim any endorsement of their actions by the charity.” Although Awad didn’t refer to CAIR himself, IONA had already done so, and the disclaimer the IRS calls for never came.
Nihad Awad, National Executive Director of CAIR, delivered a sermon at the Islamic Organization of North America in Warren, Michigan, days before a primary set to put Abdul El-Sayed, the first Muslim Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in history, on the ballot: “The Muslim community in Michigan … you have made history. Continue to make history!” (IONA/YouTube)
Awad tried to exercise caution, but the implications of what he said still appear to cross the IRS’s line. “The masjid [mosque] has restrictions, you cannot endorse certain candidates as a mosque,” Awad told the congregation after telling them that “there is election on August 4,” and before adding, “The Muslim community in Michigan … you have made history. Continue to make history!” Considering that El-Sayed’s candidacy had by then received national coverage—including from Mehdi Hasan—focused on his potential to become the first Muslim U.S. senator, voting for El-Sayed was the only readily apparent way for the Muslim community in Michigan to “make history” with their votes.
The executive director of CAIR-Michigan [EIN: 38-3534607], Dawud Walid, followed with logistical voting information and told the congregation, “We can’t tell you who to vote for, but brother Nihad laid out a very nice framework for us in looking at who is best for our community.”
Two-Thirds Caught, Almost None Punished
The IRS appears to have adopted a policy of lax enforcement. “Consequences of intervention,” according to the IRS, are that the nonprofit “could lose its tax-exempt status, and it could be subject to an excise tax on the amount of money spent on that activity.” Those penalties exist mostly on paper. The IRS course states: “Since 2004, the IRS has conducted limited scope examinations of allegations of political campaign activity by section 501(c)(3) organizations. While less than half of the allegations received resulted in an examination, the IRS found political campaign intervention in over two-thirds of the organizations that were selected for examination.” The agency states that although it has “proposed revocation in a few egregious cases,” it is “primarily interested in educating organizations and promoting compliance,” adding, “in most of these cases, we alerted the organization to the violation and strongly cautioned them not to repeat the activity.” Unfortunately, a good talking-to will not deter activists driven by a religious zeal that, for the Brotherhood-linked groups at least, seeks “civilization jihad.”
“In most of these cases, we alerted the organization to the violation and strongly cautioned them not to repeat the activity.”
While the IRS remains lenient, Congress has started to act. On September 16, 2026, Rep. Keith Self cited FWI’s recent report on this year’s ISNA convention in a letter to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and posted on X that he is “requesting the IRS investigate and complete a full review of ISNA’s tax-exempt status.” However, there is no record of any action regarding the mosques and other groups named above.
Congress also acted on January 13, 2026, when House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith referred CAIR-California [EIN: 77-0411194] to the IRS for investigation and possible revocation of its exemption, citing—among other things—alleged misuse of federal refugee funds and CAIR’s alleged support for illegal campus encampments. Smith’s letter also cited “CAIR’s apparent intervention in the Presidential campaign when endorsing and sponsoring a ‘Protest Donald Trump’ rally at the annual Minnesota Republican Party Lincoln-Reagan Dinner,” and the committee’s announcement said the referral raised “concerning reports the network violated the prohibition on 501(c)(3)s directly or indirectly participating, or intervening in, any political campaign.” The CAIR-California referral followed an earlier series of referrals: in September 2024, Smith’s committee sent letters asking the IRS to investigate and revoke the tax-exempt status of several organizations. In October 2025, Smith sent a follow-up asking the agency to “prioritize” examinations of organizations previously referred. As of August 27, 2026, Secretary Bessent was reportedly preparing to review CAIR’s tax-exempt status—but under a separate executive order targeting nonprofits with a “substantial illegal purpose” tied (in the New York Post’s words) to “political violence, protests or radical ideologies,” not under the campaign-intervention statute that Smith flagged.
Not every organization mentioned here is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, several branches of which the U.S. government designated as terrorist organizations in January 2026. Nor do all the organizations above have ties to the Islamic Republic of Iran or a history of supporting terrorist organizations that Tehran sponsors, such as Hezbollah and Hamas. But enough do. In sum, the pattern of permitting Islamists to engage in the sort of political activity that appears to violate the Johnson Amendment exposes the country to dangers far exceeding anything that Lyndon Johnson could have anticipated when he introduced the amendment. Ideally, the government should investigate violations by all organizations, but, in light of limited federal funding, expediency and prioritization are required when dealing with violations by actors whose stated aims arguably include irrevocably altering the American way of life.
Editor’s note: Every organization and individual whose conduct is described in this article was contacted for comment, most by email. Where no email address could be located, contact was made through the organization’s website form or by telephone. Governor Phil Murphy’s 2021 campaign address returned the message as undeliverable; he was also contacted through his former office. No direct contact information could be found for Atia Shahnaz, PASWO’s founder, who was reached only through the organization. All responses received are reproduced in full below, and any further response will be added as it arrives.
Responses:
