In this discussion, Emily Tamkin, a global affairs journalist and author, unpacks the recently passed legislation regarding terrorist financing and American hostages. She highlights concerns over its potential to label nonprofits as terrorist funders, particularly in a politically charged environment with Trump potentially returning to power. Tamkin also addresses how this bill reflects broader threats to democratic freedoms and the chilling effects on civic organizations that advocate for marginalized voices.
The Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties Act's vague language may allow misuse against nonprofits, threatening civic freedoms and due process.
Democrats are reassessing their support for the bill due to fears of its potential weaponization against political dissent once Trump returns to power.
Deep dives
The Controversial Nonprofit Legislation
The Stop Terror Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act aims to prevent the IRS from penalizing Americans held hostage abroad, a widely supported provision. However, its second component, which seeks to expedite the process of stripping nonprofits of their tax-exempt status if deemed to support terrorism, raises significant concerns. Critics argue that the bill is overly vague, granting excessive discretion to the Treasury Secretary without clear guidelines or the requirement for due process. This vagueness opens the door for potential misuse, wherein organizations could be falsely accused and subsequently lose their nonprofit status, undermining civic freedoms.
Bipartisan Support and Changing Perspectives
Initially, the bill enjoyed broad bipartisan backing, reflecting a common fear of being perceived as soft on national security. However, post-Donald Trump's election, some Democrats have reconsidered their support, fearing that the legislation could be weaponized against political opponents and dissenting voices. Concerns are particularly strong regarding how the bill may impact nonprofit organizations advocating for civil rights, environmental justice, or other contentious issues. As some Democrats withdraw their support, the remaining proponents argue that their stance is not influenced by the political climate, emphasizing a need to maintain a tough approach against terrorism.
Potential Impacts on Civil Society
If enacted, the legislation could significantly stifle dissent and hinder the operations of various nonprofit organizations. By labeling groups as terrorist-supporting without sufficient evidence, the bill creates a chilling effect that could deter funding and collaborations within civil society. Historical precedents from countries with similar laws, such as Russia and Hungary, illustrate how such measures can be used to suppress opposition and silence diverse voices. Ultimately, this legislation has the potential to erode civil liberties, making it challenging for advocacy groups to fulfill their missions under the threat of losing their credibility and tax-exempt status.
The House already voted to pass the “The Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act.” But with Donald Trump returning to the White House next year, some Democrats are viewing the power that the bill gives the executive branch—to label non-profit organizations as “funding terrorism” and strip them of their non-profit status—in a new light.
Want more What Next? Join Slate Plus to unlock full, ad-free access to What Next and all your other favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the What Next show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/whatnextplus to get access wherever you listen.
Podcast production by Elena Schwartz, Paige Osburn, Anna Phillips, Madeline Ducharme and Rob Gunther.