H.R. 9495, or the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, has ignited fierce opposition among progressives, civil rights advocates, and nonprofit organizations. They warn the bill could be weaponized to strip nonprofits of their tax-exempt status without due process, granting President-elect Donald Trump and his administration unprecedented power to target political opponents.
The proposed legislation combines two disparate elements: tax relief for hostages and the ability for the Treasury secretary to revoke the 501(c)(3) status of organizations deemed “terrorist-supporting.” Critics have labeled it a cynical attempt to silence dissent under the guise of national security. Progressive leaders like Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and civil rights groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argue that the bill poses a significant threat to free speech and democracy.
“No excuses,” Tlaib wrote on social media. “Every single one of my Democratic colleagues should be voting against this bill that gives Trump and his incoming administration dictatorial powers to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies without due process.”
Under the bill, the Treasury secretary would have the authority to designate an organization as “terrorist-supporting” with little transparency or evidence required. Once a notice of intent is issued, the organization would lose its 501(c)(3) status, effectively ending its ability to operate. The targeted nonprofit could appeal within 90 days, but in the interim, it would face severe financial and reputational damage, including difficulty securing donations and accessing banking services.
Ryan Costello, policy director at the National Iranian American Council Action, explained the bill’s devastating impact. “It basically empowers the Treasury secretary to target any group it wants to call them a terror supporter and block their ability to be a nonprofit. So that would essentially kill any nonprofit’s ability to function. They couldn’t get banks to service them, they won’t be able to get donations, and there’d be a black mark on the organization, even if it cleared its name.”
The bill does not require officials to provide an explanation for designating a group, nor does it obligate the Treasury Department to present evidence of wrongdoing. This lack of accountability has raised alarm bells among advocates who see it as a tool for authoritarian suppression.
Tlaib has been one of the most vocal opponents of the bill, particularly given its timing amidst heightened protests over U.S. support for Israel’s military actions in Gaza. “This is authoritarianism,” Tlaib said. “This bill is designed to silence dissent and give Trump unchecked power to target groups he doesn’t agree with.”
Other progressive lawmakers echoed her concerns. Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) called the legislation “a giant threat to free speech,” warning that it would allow the government to “label any nonprofit as ‘terrorist-supporting’ without evidence or due process—opening the door to crush opposition and silence dissent.” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) added that “no one person should have the authority to silence organizations that dare to challenge government policies or speak uncomfortable truths.”
Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who is leaving Congress after losing his primary to a candidate backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), described the bill as “extremely dangerous.” He cautioned that it “will sink us further into authoritarianism. It is an extremely dangerous bill that would give the government unlimited power to stop the work of humanitarian groups and target political enemies. All without transparency or evidence.”
While the bill is widely seen as a response to criticism of U.S. support for Israel, its potential impact goes far beyond organizations advocating for Palestinian rights. Costello warned that “the danger is much broader than just groups that work on foreign policy. It could target major liberal funders who support Palestinian solidarity and peace groups who engage in protest. But it could also theoretically be used to target pro-choice groups, and I could see it being used against environmental groups.”
Jewish Voice for Peace Action’s political director Beth Miller described the legislation as “terrifying,” emphasizing its potential to suppress civil society across the board. “This bill should be a five-alarm fire for anyone who seeks to protect free speech, civil society, and democracy. This is part of a broader MAGA assault on the right to protest that begins with attacks on Palestinian rights groups and is aimed at outlawing the social justice movements that fight for progressive change. This is part of a well-worn authoritarian playbook to dismantle fundamental freedoms.”
The ACLU has taken a leading role in opposing H.R. 9495, mobilizing a coalition of advocacy groups to sound the alarm. In a letter sent to Congress, the organization argued that the bill’s vague language and lack of accountability make it an “open invitation for abuse.”
“This broad, vague bill is an open invitation for abuse,” the ACLU wrote on social media. “As soon as tomorrow, the House will vote on a bill that would give the incoming Trump administration a new tool they could use to stifle free speech, target political opponents, and punish groups that disagree with them.”
Amnesty International USA executive director Paul O’Brien framed the legislation as a direct threat to democracy. “In any other context, this legislation would be seen for what it is, a play from the authoritarian leader’s playbook,” O’Brien said. “Members of Congress must recognize the danger posed and vote down this bill that could shrink civic space and silence civil society organizations.”
H.R. 9495’s vague and sweeping powers have drawn fierce opposition from progressives, civil rights advocates, and nonprofit organizations, all warning of its potential to silence dissent and suppress democracy.
“This bill is part of a broader MAGA assault on the right to protest,” said Beth Miller. “This is part of a well-worn authoritarian playbook to dismantle fundamental freedoms.”
COMMENTS