(The Center Square) — A lot of noise has been made about a tiny detail in the proposed Amendment 2 to Louisiana’s constitution. That noise has meant a lawsuit and a great deal of what Amendment 2 backers say is misinformation.

The detail in question is the removal of certain tax exemptions for religious nonprofits from Louisiana’s constitution. These exemptions would not be eliminated entirely–they would remain protected in general law.

Exemptions for “religious property used as a house of worship, residential housing for clergy, and educational institutions for religious ministry,” would remain in the constitution, meaning the legislature could not change them with a vote. To remove them would require a constitutional amendment.

“CA2 preserves the fundamental [constitutional] protections for religious property used as a house of worship, residential housing for clergy, and educational institutions for religious ministry,” the Department of Revenue wrote in a letter to Gov. Jeff Landry. “This new constitutional provision is in addition to the current religious nonprofit organization exemption language preserved in statute. This means that there will be no change to any property tax exemption as result of the passage of CA2.”

Rep. Julie Emerson, R-Lafayette, who helped author the amendment, mentioned a pastor who was worried that his church’s baseball field would now be taxed. Emerson told The Center Square that it would remain protected in statute were the amendment to pass, “along with every other nonprofit.”

“There is no grand plan to change anything about that. It was literally just about cleaning up the constitution,” Emerson said.

To remove the exemptions out of statute would require a two-thirds vote from the Legislature.

“We’ve listened to the criticisms too, and language can be a tricky thing,” Gene Mills, President of the Louisiana Family Forum said in an interview. “Obviously, everybody would have preferred that it remained unchanged, but that’s not the direction this body went. We met with some key religious leaders to discuss how to shore up the concerns that remain. Now that churches are still protected within the Constitution, other nonprofits are moved to statute, and we get the language correct.”

Mills emphasized that there was no intent by Landry and the Legislature to strip protections for religious organizations and said the amendment’s authors are working to ensure the changes are clearly understood.

“The intention was to move out of the Constitution what they thought were statutory parameters,” Mills said. “Now the struggle is over whether we got it right. We’re making some gentle suggestions on how to accomplish that.”

Mills also noted that removing an exemption from statute would require a high threshold — two-thirds approval in both legislative chambers and the governor’s signature. He said this would make it difficult for a future Legislature to strip exemptions from nonprofits without broad consensus.

Daniel Erspamer, CEO of the Pelican Institute, pointed to the broader implications of constitutional amendments like CA2.

“Louisiana’s constitution is one of the longest and most complex in the country,” Erspamer said. “This means lawmakers’ hands are unnecessarily and unproductively tied when they’re working to reflect their constituents’ priorities.”

Erspamer argued that streamlining the constitution would create a more flexible and responsive government, benefiting both taxpayers and businesses looking for stability in tax and regulatory environments.

“With more than 80% of the state’s $50 billion budget pre-determined, lawmakers have little flexibility when economic downturns occur,” Erspamer said. “That’s why taxes were raised by over $1 billion from 2016 to 2023.”

Ultimately, while Amendment 2 has drawn criticism and concern, its proponents insist that it is a necessary step in modernizing Louisiana’s tax policies and constitutional framework.

As voters prepare to decide on the amendment, the debate underscores the delicate balance between preserving protections and ensuring a more adaptable governance structure.

The lawsuit in opposition to the amendment includes Reverend Willie Calhoun Jr. as a plaintiff. Calhoun is the principal officer of Lower Ninth Ward Community Wellness Consortium, a nonprofit in New Orleans.

Lower Ninth Ward is not a religious nonprofit, so Calhoun’s status as tax-exempt might not survive the Legislature’s scrutiny down the road if they decide to eliminate some exemptions for general nonprofits out of statute, such as “[p]roperty leased to such a nonprofit corporation or association for use solely as housing for homeless persons.”