(National Review) Bobby Miller - The boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which singles out Israel for reproach and condemnation, aims to punish Israel for policies often pursued in self-defense. In 2015, Tennessee became the first state to pass an anti-BDS law, calling the movement "one of the main vehicles for spreading anti-Semitism and advocating the elimination of the Jewish state." By 2021, 35 states had passed laws that ban public entities (such as state pension funds) from doing business with companies that boycott Israel. Anti-BDS statutes have drawn fire from Israel's detractors and from free-speech advocates. But according to a recent academic study, "Boycotts: A First Amendment History," by Josh Halpern and Lavi Ben Dor, there is a U.S. tradition of regulating boycotts. The authors explained that those who violate an anti-BDS statute "are not fined or otherwise subject to legal sanction, but merely lose their access to certain privileges like state contracts or investments." Halpern explained in an interview that "during the heyday of the Arab League's boycott of Israel, states like New York and Massachusetts enacted laws that were plainly designed to prevent economic discrimination against Israel and Israeli firms. The fact that those states thought that they could pass those laws without raising any constitutional issues is a good indicator that contemporary anti-BDS laws pass constitutional muster." Modern anti-boycott laws surgically target "the act of boycotting, while leaving regulated entities free to say whatever they please."
2023-02-16 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive