Skip To Content
JEWISH. INDEPENDENT. NONPROFIT.
Community

The Cowardly Reasons Jewish Organizations Won’t Speak Out Against Trump Appointees: And Why We Must Demand That They Do

When I learned of Trump’s first round of political appointments, I turned immediately to my community. I knew that the leaders and organizations that have nourished me and been part of my family’s Jewish life would understand the dire call to act. The possibility of white supremacists occupying the White House would surely draw a clear and unified response. It pains me to say that some of these most important leaders and organizations have remained silent.

I have called and emailed several leaders, such as leaders of Jewish Federations and chapters of the American Jewish Committee, asking when will they speak out. The response I receive is chilling. They tell me they are not political. And, thus, because they are not political, they must refrain from speaking against Trump’s political appointments.

I am chilled because I am an historian of modern Jewry, and I know that Jewish organizations sometimes have chosen quietism to great detriment, whether we look to 1930s Germany or earlier periods in Jewish history. I am also chilled because I recognize this response as, at best, a misunderstanding of what it means to be part of the American nonprofit complex, and, at worst, a cowardly lie.

Charitable organizations assume a nonpolitical posture for several reasons. Perhaps most importantly, they want to appeal to as wide a base of supporters and donors as possible and think that acting politically will run counter to that goal. Others may claim that political activity will put them in violation of the Johnson Amendment, passed in 1954 as part of the legislation that established section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code. Yet as the Johnson Amendment makes clear, charitable organizations are banned only from campaigning on behalf of a political candidate. Once an official is elected, charitable organizations are free to engage in political speech about policies and appointments. Finally, some organizations may believe that their mission is inherently not political.

By their very form, however, charitable organizations are political, a fact that imposes upon every single charitable organization today a grave responsibility. All organizations that receive a 501(c)3 designation are part of our country’s political process, entering into a contract to act for the public good in return for the tax exemptions they receive.

Unlike a corporation that has a select group of shareholders to which it must answer, a charitable organization must regard the public as its shareholders. This is why, when a policy or political appointment threatens the very nature of our country’s public good, there are no other organizations as well positioned as 501(c)3 designated ones to issue a protest in the name of the public. The most compelling reason that our political process continues to exempt nonprofit organizations from taxation is to give them the flexibility to speak about and act for the public good.

If that organization benefits from dollars flowing through our political system; if that organization chooses to maintain its 501(c)3 status and receive a tax exemption that subsidizes its work with public revenue tax dollars; and if that organization then attempts to hold itself apart from or above the political process, then that organization is misleading the public and itself.

Anti-Semitism, racism, sexism, and homophobia are all deeply political forms of behavior that work to change how power operates. These are not and never should be partisan issues. Yet as I write, countless 501(c)3 organizations cloak their silence about Trump’s appointment of white supremacists to high posts in his administration as a virtue or a mandate: that of being apolitical. We must tell these organizations that we cannot tolerate their evasion, and we will not support them if they persist in it.

Whether they like it or not, our country’s charitable organizations are part of our political process and owe their very existence to it. Now is the time for the leaders and organizations to step up to the duty of their status and the resources that we, the public, have entrusted to them. At this moment, to do anything else would be an act of cowardice.

A message from our Publisher & CEO Rachel Fishman Feddersen

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s award-winning, nonprofit journalism during this critical time.

We’ve set a goal to raise $260,000 by December 31. That’s an ambitious goal, but one that will give us the resources we need to invest in the high quality news, opinion, analysis and cultural coverage that isn’t available anywhere else.

If you feel inspired to make an impact, now is the time to give something back. Join us as a member at your most generous level.

—  Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

With your support, we’ll be ready for whatever 2025 brings.

Republish This Story

Please read before republishing

We’re happy to make this story available to republish for free, unless it originated with JTA, Haaretz or another publication (as indicated on the article) and as long as you follow our guidelines. You must credit the Forward, retain our pixel and preserve our canonical link in Google search.  See our full guidelines for more information, and this guide for detail about canonical URLs.

To republish, copy the HTML by clicking on the yellow button to the right; it includes our tracking pixel, all paragraph styles and hyperlinks, the author byline and credit to the Forward. It does not include images; to avoid copyright violations, you must add them manually, following our guidelines. Please email us at [email protected], subject line “republish,” with any questions or to let us know what stories you’re picking up.

We don't support Internet Explorer

Please use Chrome, Safari, Firefox, or Edge to view this site.