The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA) is taking legal steps against the political action committee Evangelicals for Harris for using sermon footage of the late Reverend Billy Graham in their advertising campaign aimed at criticizing former President Donald Trump.

According to the Christian Post, the BGEA contends the ad campaign misuses Billy Graham's legacy by politically leveraging his sermons, an act they say he would never have endorsed.

Last month, Evangelicals for Harris introduced a controversial $1 million ad campaign. It prominently features snippets from Billy Graham's 1988 sermons in a video titled "Keep Clear," which paints Donald Trump in a negative light.

In reaction, the BGEA sent a cease-and-desist letter to the PAC, asserting their charge of unauthorized use and potential copyright infringement. They argue that the educational or sermon-based nature of the footage was manipulated for political ends, violating their copyright ownership.

According to the BGEA, Billy Graham, who passed away in 2018, had expressed regrets about his involvement in politics later in his life. The Association emphasized that Graham had always intended his ministry to be apolitical and dedicated solely to the Gospel.

Franklin Graham Supports Trump Amidst Legal Dispute

Billy Graham's eldest son, Franklin Graham, has taken a different path by openly supporting Donald Trump, adding another layer of complexity to the controversy. Franklin Graham, who is widely recognized in evangelical circles, was the last presidential candidate for whom Billy Graham voted.

This clash over the use of Billy Graham's sermons serves not only as a legal battle but also highlights varying political alignments within the Graham family and their followers. Franklin’s stance has come under fire from within his own family as well.

Jerushah Duford, Franklin Graham's niece, has criticized her uncle's unwavering support for Trump, contrasting her uncle's actions against the needs of her family during a natural disaster. She shared her grievances publicly, questioning his priorities and Christian principles.

PAC Claims Fair Use Over Sermon Footage

In response to the legal threat from BGEA, Evangelicals for Harris defended their campaign. They argue that their use of the sermon footage is protected under the Copyright Act's fair use clause, stating that the use was limited and contextually altered for a modern political message.

Reverend Jim Ball, known for his environmental activism and previous support for Biden, leads the PAC and insists that their campaign seeks to redirect the focus of evangelical Christian values away from Trump and towards more fundamental Christian teachings.

Further stirring the evangelical community, the PAC's statements regarding Franklin Graham's support for Trump highlight a deep rift over the interpretation of Christian leadership and the integrity of political endorsements by religious figures.

Legal and Familial Disagreements Illuminate Wider Issues

The BGEA remains firm in its position, pointing out the significant impact such misuse of Billy Graham's sermons could have on his apolitical and spiritual legacy. They argue that Billy Graham's historical refusal to publicly criticize U.S. presidents aligns with his overarching approach to focus solely on Christian teachings without a political agenda.

The cease-and-desist correspondence reflects the BGEA's intention to protect what they believe are the foundational principles of Billy Graham's ministry. A spokesperson highlighted Graham's lifelong mission was to provide spiritual counsel to leaders based on Christian doctrine, not to engage in political battles.

The tension between familial legacy, legal rights, and political advocacy underscores the challenges facing religious organizations involved in politics. As the BGEA prepares potential further legal actions, the evangelical community watches closely, caught between reverence for a spiritual leader and the polarizing dynamics of modern American politics.

New Developments Expected in Evangelical Political Advocacy

As the dispute progresses, it could set precedents for how political contexts use religious content, particularly regarding copyright laws and the definition of fair use in such scenarios.

Observers and stakeholders await responses from both parties, stressing the delicate balance between respecting religious heritage and addressing current political issues. This legal conflict may prompt a broader discussion on the intersection of faith, copyright law, and political expression in the increasingly digital and interconnected public sphere.

The ongoing legal skirmish between BGEA and Evangelicals for Harris not only explores the boundaries of copyright and fair use but also the soul of evangelical political engagement in America's vibrant democratic landscape.