US congressman brands India’s FCRA Amendment Bill ‘a clear attack against Christians’, warns of strain in ties with Washington

New Delhi: A senior Republican lawmaker in Washington has waded into India’s domestic debate over foreign funding rules, warning that proposed changes could become a serious irritant in ties between the two countries. The intervention comes as Parliament prepares to take up contentious amendments to its foreign contribution law during the ongoing monsoon session, as RNA Media reported on Tuesday.

Riley Moore, a Republican congressman from West Virginia, took to X on Tuesday to denounce the draft legislation. He described the proposed Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026 as handing authorities the ability to assume control of churches and faith-based charitable bodies.

Moore framed his objection in historical terms, invoking the roots of Christianity on the subcontinent before turning to the bill itself. “Christians have been in India since St. Thomas the Apostle travelled to the Malabar coast just decades after the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ,” he wrote, adding that despite this long lineage, the Indian Parliament was considering rules to permit government takeovers of churches and religious charities.

He did not mince his words on the political fallout. “This is a clear attack against Christians,” Moore said, cautioning that if the bill proceeds in its current form, it would become a point of major concern in the bilateral relationship.

The bill’s stated purpose is narrower than Moore’s framing suggests. The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026 seeks to ensure that foreign contributions received by NGOs are not used in a manner prejudicial to national interests. Among its key provisions, the legislation would empower the government to take over the assets of organizations that fail to comply with FCRA registration requirements.

The Centre is expected to formally table the bill during the monsoon session, which is currently underway. Once introduced, it is likely to be referred to a parliamentary committee before any vote, though the government has signalled it intends to press ahead relatively quickly.

Opposition to the draft has not come from Washington alone. The proposed legislation has drawn criticism from several Christian organisations, which argue that some of its provisions could adversely affect charitable institutions that have served poor and vulnerable communities for decades. Last month, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India submitted a memorandum to the union home minister, Amit Shah, urging the government to withdraw the bill and redraft it only after wider consultation with stakeholders.

Moore’s comments did not emerge in isolation. He has previously made the protection of Christians a prominent part of his congressional work, with his office backing legislative and policy initiatives on religious persecution, including efforts focused on Nigeria. Earlier this year, President Trump asked Moore, alongside the House Appropriations Committee chairman, Tom Cole, to lead a congressional investigation into attacks on Christian communities in Nigeria, underlining Moore’s standing within the administration’s inner circle on faith-related foreign policy questions.

This is not the first time India’s foreign contribution rules have drawn scrutiny from American lawmakers. Members of both parties in Congress raised similar concerns when amendments to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act were first mooted earlier this year, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, James Risch, calling the proposals “deeply concerning” and flagging the risk of financial restrictions being used against US-linked Christian ministries.

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom has separately pressed the country’s secretary of state, Marco Rubio, to raise the issue directly with Indian officials.

The row unfolds against an already uneven year for India-US relations, marked by tariff disputes tied to India’s continued purchase of Russian oil and recurring friction over religious freedom and civil-society space. New Delhi has consistently rejected such criticism as interference in its internal affairs, arguing that the FCRA amendments are aimed at preventing misuse of foreign funds rather than targeting any particular faith.

New Delhi is yet to issue an official response to Moore’s remarks.