On Sunday, February 25, at their annual convention in San Diego, California, Democrats approved a set of positions on pending legislation that includes opposition to S 720/HR 1697, the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, a federal bill that would impose draconian penalties for boycotts regarding Israel under certain circumstances; and S 170/HR 2856, the Combatting BDS Act, which purports to permit and encourage states to enact similar laws–as many have.
#Massachusetts won't move a bill that would have falsely classified #BDS as 'discrimination'; this is a big victory for BDS & #FreedomOfSpeech; kudos to the @ACLU, @jvplive & everyone who helped stop this attempt to silence critics of #ApartheidIsrael~!https://t.co/OO1SpMdkKJ
— Pauline Park (@paulinepark) February 13, 2018
The ACLU, among others, has sounded the alarm about such laws, saying they are unconstitutional because they seek to “punish individuals for no reason other than their political beliefs.”
The Anti-Boycott Act could impose fines of up to $1 million and 20 years in prison against any US individuals or entities that support, or whose actions “have the effect of furthering or supporting,” a boycott of Israel or its illegal settlements called for by “international governmental organizations” such as the United Nations or European Union.
My latest in @jacobinmag on how McCarthyist tactics like loyalty oaths have resurfaced in the context of BDS, & this week's @ACLU victory in Kansas. https://t.co/hi0m4OQUdc
— radhika sainath (@radhikasainath) February 3, 2018
In the first judicial test of such laws, brought by the ACLU, a federal court last month blocked enforcement of Kansas’ anti-boycott statute after a teacher was denied a state contract when she observed her church’s decision to boycott products from illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
In a detailed decision, the judge explained that it is clearly illegal for government to force someone to waive a constitutional right (here, political speech, including boycott) to obtain a benefit to which she is otherwise entitled (here, the right to compete for a contract).
Historic ruling: Judge finds boycotts of Israel to be Constitutionally-protected https://t.co/zGUjQzauoU | @ACLU #BDS pic.twitter.com/TaHSXf1ZTf
— Adalah-NY (@AdalahNY) January 31, 2018
In a parallel move, California Democrats Sunday approved a platform that excised a section from the Platform Committee’s first draft that would have had them “join the national Democratic Party in opposing any effort to delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement.”
Mik Jordahl is standing up against anti-BDS political litmus tests that prevent him from standing up against other forms of injustice. Thanks to Jordahl and the @ACLU for defending our #righttoboycott for Palestinian rights! #BDShttps://t.co/KgpVNhOB9X
— Palestinian Rights (@US_Campaign) January 10, 2018
“We hope and believe that with the Kansas ruling and now our state party’s opposition to such unconstitutional laws and removal of the platform clause, the tide is starting to turn against this concerted effort to stigmatize and suppress a form of nonviolent protest against Israeli government policies that is taking hold around the country,” said Iyad Alfalqa, chair of the Arab American Caucus.
The Democrat party in California just came out in support for #BDS https://t.co/C7XdnY59JX #Shame
— RJC (@RJC) February 28, 2018
The party also approved a recommendation from the Legislation Committee to support HR 4391, the Promoting Human Rights by Ending Israeli Military Detention of Palestinian Children Act, introduced recently by Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., that would prevent the use of US tax dollars for the Israeli military’s ongoing detention and mistreatment of Palestinian children. Its 21 co-sponsors to date include four California Democrats.
As Ahed Tamimi's unjust trial begins today, following her ongoing unjust detention in Israeli prisons, over 10 million Indian women demand her freedom. They demand freedom for all Palestinian child prisoners & endorse BDS to end Israeli human rights abuses https://t.co/EBV4eGsLrt pic.twitter.com/TF8SLtgfbl
— BDS Movement (@BDSmovement) February 13, 2018
Sections regarding Israel-Palestine were the most contentious to come up during the five-hour Platform Committee hearing Feb. 23, said David L. Mandel, lead sponsor of an entire alternative plank on “World Peace and International Relations” submitted with backing from leaders of the party’s Progressive, Arab-American and Veterans caucuses.
On another section, he said, “we couldn’t get the committee to oppose Trump’s moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, but it added support for a possible capital in East Jerusalem for a Palestinian state.”
‘US spits in faces of Palestinians’: Embassy to be moved to Jerusalem sooner than planned https://t.co/FLu1ZCU3tN pic.twitter.com/gw1dO7aode
— RT (@RT_com) February 24, 2018
The Jerusalem clause and other wording that remains left the amendments’ proponents less than fully satisfied, said Progressive Caucus chair Karen Bernal.
“But the state party is becoming more progressive on many levels, and it’s time to adopt a human rights/international law-based approach supporting equality for Palestinians and Israeli Jews, no matter what political solution is eventually worked out.”
At its previous convention in May 2017, the state party adopted a resolution that did exactly that, the activists noted.
(Mondoweiss, PC, Social Media)
