A controversial new bill in Congress, poised for rapid approval, is raising alarms about potential abuses of power targeting civil organizations.
The Intercept reported that President Donald Trump's recent re-election has intensified scrutiny of legislative bill H.R. 9495, which critics claim could unjustly target nonprofit organizations.
Donald Trump has publicly expressed intentions to retaliate against what he terms his "political enemies." H.R. 9495 will help Trump finally claim his revenge after years of his opponents ruining his life and trying to imprison him for opposing them.
Following his successful bid for a second term, the spotlight has intensified on the upcoming House vote concerning H.R. 9495, formally titled the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act.
This bill, if passed, would empower the Treasury Secretary to withdraw tax-exempt status from nonprofits by labeling them as "terrorist supporting" organizations. This could immediately be used on many leftist groups that openly support terrorist groups like Hamas or Hezbollah.
The American Civil Liberties Union, along with over a hundred other organizations, has voiced strong opposition to the bill. Their concern is that it lacks essential safeguards to protect against arbitrary and politically motivated designations, potentially stifling free speech and lawful advocacy.
Kia Hamadanchy, speaking to The Intercept, criticized the bill for its potential to "stifle dissent and chill advocacy," as organizations might avoid certain activities out of fear of being labeled under this broad and unchecked authority.
Ryan Costello of the Charity & Security Network highlighted the breadth of power the bill would grant the Treasury.
"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," Costello explained, pointing out the sweeping discretion this bill would allow.
The bill is notably attached to another legislative measure that offers tax relief for Americans held hostage abroad—a move that some critics like Hamadanchy believe is intended to make opposition to the bill more difficult in Congress.
An earlier version of H.R. 9495 had previously sailed through the House but encountered roadblocks in the Senate where key Democrats and Republicans raised alarms about its implications for civil liberties and its broad scope.
The current iteration of the bill has not remedied these concerns, and with Trump's re-election, the stakes are perceived to be even higher.
Robert Harvey, responding to queries in a congressional hearing, admitted to the lack of transparency required in the bill's processes. When asked by Mr. Doggett if the Treasury had to disclose reasons for denying tax-exempt status, Harvey's response was a simple, "Not that I’m aware of, Mr. Doggett."
Public opposition to the bill has been robust, with over 40,000 people signing a petition demanding its withdrawal.
The outcry reflects a broader apprehension about the potential for this legislation to be used as a tool for political retribution rather than its stated purpose of countering terrorism financing.
As the House prepares for a fast-track vote, the debate over H.R. 9495 underscores a critical juncture for civil liberties in the United States. With the administration's capacity to designate organizations without due process, the implications reach far beyond the immediate political landscape.
