Should the IRS Care About CAIR?

The role of major nonprofit organizations often comes under a spotlight, but few have drawn as much scrutiny as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Recent calls for an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) investigation have put CAIR back in national headlines. With long-running debates about its history, leadership, funding, and influence, questions about whether the group should keep its IRS 501c3 tax-exempt status are heating up.

This video summary, generated with artificial intelligence, looks at the controversy, the stakeholders, and what’s at risk for CAIR’s future.

Why Senator Tom Cotton Wants the IRS to Investigate CAIR

Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas has publicly urged the IRS to launch a formal investigation into CAIR. In a letter addressed to IRS Commissioner Billy Long, Cotton questions whether CAIR deserves its IRS 501c3 tax-exempt status. His main argument: there’s significant evidence linking CAIR to organizations and individuals with ties to terrorism, particularly Hamas.

Cotton points out that a nonprofit, if found supporting terrorism or acting against U.S. interests, shouldn’t enjoy the benefits tax-exempt status brings. He ties these concerns back to past government findings and legal cases that connect CAIR to alleged anti-American activities.

Key points raised by Senator Cotton:

• CAIR’s alleged historic connections to terrorist groups
• The need to re-evaluate CAIR’s eligibility for 501c3 nonprofit status
• Concerns that U.S. tax law may have been misused

Echoes from Robert Spencer and Other Critics

Robert Spencer, author and director of Jihad Watch, supports Cotton’s call for an investigation. As a long-time critic of Islamist extremism, Spencer says, “This is something that should have been done many years ago. This is an organization that very much needs to be exposed, investigated, and shut down.”

Spencer and other critics argue that CAIR’s roots and ongoing activities put it at odds with American values. They stress the importance of transparency concerning CAIR’s operations and finances.

The Origins of CAIR and Old Allegations Revisited

How and Why CAIR Was Founded

CAIR was started by Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad in the mid-1990s. Both were previously involved with the Islamic Association for Palestine, a group the government later dissolved after labeling it a Hamas front.

A 1998 article captured a controversial statement from co-founder Nihad Awad:

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America.”

This statement has resurfaced repeatedly during CAIR’s controversies, raising doubts among critics about the group’s intentions and values.

Legal Battles and Courtroom Drama

CAIR’s connections came under stronger scrutiny during the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial. The U.S. government named CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator when the Holy Land Foundation was convicted of funneling millions to Hamas. That case became a major pivot point in arguments over CAIR’s legitimacy.

In 2004, CAIR filed a defamation lawsuit against Navy veteran Andrew Whitehead, who publicly labeled the group a “terrorist supporting front organization.” CAIR settled out of court. Importantly, the statements Whitehead published remained online, signaling that the court didn’t find them false or defamatory at the conclusion.

Attorney Reed Rubinstein, who represented Whitehead, summed up the outcome: CAIR chose not to continue fighting as “these statements were no longer either false or defamatory.”

CAIR’s Response to the Most Recent Crisis

Following the October 7th Hamas attack in Israel, CAIR’s executive director Nihad Awad made remarks about Palestinians “breaking the siege,” which critics saw as support for violent action. This prompted the White House to cut ties with CAIR.

When asked about Awad’s remarks, CAIR responded, “We specifically condemned attacks on civilians on October 7th, just as we condemned the ongoing genocide in Gaza.”

This public condemnation has not settled concerns for all critics, but it shows CAIR’s attempt to distance itself from violent acts and clarify its stance.

CAIR’s Influence in American Society

CAIR’s rise to prominence hasn’t happened quietly. The organization claims a strong voice for American Muslims, taking active roles in government engagement, legal actions, and advocacy.

Areas where CAIR is influential:

• Government Access: Regular participation in policy discussions, hearings, and legislative advocacy
• Public Advocacy: High-profile campaigns and public statements on civil rights
• Legal Activity: Frequent lawsuits defending Muslim Americans’ rights

Some, like Robert Spencer, believe CAIR’s expanding influence made its leaders feel “untouchable.” This has, in their view, allowed bold public statements without fearing consequences.

The Politics of Accusation

Journalist Dale Hurd accuses CAIR of positioning itself as a victim, citing efforts to portray American Muslims as targets of widespread discrimination. Hurd asserts that current CAIR messaging sways public opinion toward supporting Palestinians and opposing Israel. He also claims CAIR uses accusations of discrimination to shield itself from investigation or criticism.

He adds that the organization’s reputation benefits from an environment of “political correctness,” making officials hesitant to take strong action.

The IRS Investigation: Will It Happen and What Would It Mean?

Could the IRS Really Investigate CAIR?

It’s still not clear if the IRS will act on Cotton’s request. CAIR has operated for decades without facing a deep dive into its finances by the IRS, which raises questions about whether an investigation is likely to happen now.

Dale Hurd notes that CAIR showed an unusual willingness to respond to media requests recently, which he interprets as a possible sign that the organization is taking the investigation threat seriously.

If the IRS investigates:

• CAIR’s tax-exempt status could be removed
• Its finances and funding sources would come under close scrutiny
• The political climate (including who sits in the White House) might affect the likelihood and tone of such an inquiry

Conflicting Claims About CAIR’s Funding

Expert critics, especially Robert Spencer, argue that an investigation would uncover surprising sources of foreign funding. Spencer suggests some funds could be coming from foreign governments or groups with specific interests.

CAIR firmly rejects these claims, stating only a tiny percentage of its funds come from outside the United States.

Side-by-Side: Competing Statements About CAIR Funding

CAIR Critics’ Claim	CAIR’s Response
Funding includes money from foreign governments or suspicious sources	Only a small, negligible percent of funding comes from outside the U.S.

This disagreement sits at the heart of the push for IRS action. The issue isn’t just how much foreign money comes in, but whether any of it comes from hostile or illegal sources.

What Key Stakeholders Are Saying

Senator Tom Cotton

Cotton argues that CAIR should lose its tax-free status because of its past and present links to groups involved in terrorism. He points to historical cases, like the Holy Land Foundation trial, as proof action is overdue.

Robert Spencer

Spencer’s focus is on transparency. He wants officials to look at CAIR’s books and uncover the full story behind its funding and alliances. He’s been a loud voice for renewed attention and legal action.

CAIR

CAIR strongly denies accusations of supporting terrorism. The group says the push for an IRS investigation is little more than a political move designed to benefit Israel. CAIR insists it has publicly condemned violence from both sides and views the call for investigation as an attack on Muslim civil society groups.

Dale Hurd

Drawing on years of covering CAIR, Hurd sees today’s arguments as new outfits on old concerns. He says political correctness and public fear of being accused of prejudice prevented deeper investigation in the past. However, he hints that if political winds change, especially with assertive administration officials, CAIR’s protected status could end.

Wrapping Up: High Stakes for CAIR and Its Critics

This debate over CAIR’s status goes far beyond the technicalities of tax law. At stake is how the U.S. manages delicate issues of religious advocacy, national security, and civil rights. Senator Cotton’s call for an IRS investigation adds fuel to an ongoing fire that’s burned for over two decades.

If the IRS does investigate and finds wrongdoing, CAIR could lose its privileged status and suffer serious damage to its reputation and effectiveness. If nothing changes, critics will likely continue to voice frustration, while CAIR maintains its message of representing American Muslim interests.

What remains clear is that the conversation around CAIR is about more than just one organization—it touches on how America balances free association with national security. This story is far from over, with every new statement and investigation shaping how these issues will play out in the years ahead.