Suppressing Dissent

How the Israel lobby criminalizes free speech, boycotts, and criticism of a foreign government on American soil. 35+ states have made it illegal to boycott one specific country. All documented with ACLU filings, HRW reports, and legislative records.

35+
States with anti-BDS laws
250M+
Americans under anti-boycott laws (78%)
7 of 11
IHRA examples targeting Israel criticism
1,200+
Jewish academics opposed IHRA codification

Anti-BDS Laws


35+ US states have enacted anti-boycott legislation that penalizes businesses, contractors, and individuals who boycott Israel. These laws require Americans to give up their First Amendment right to political boycott as a condition of doing business with their own state government.

The proposed federal Israel Anti-Boycott Act would have made boycotting Israel a federal crime punishable by up to $1 million in fines and 20 years in prison.

Public Contract Bans

Companies and sole proprietors must sign a written pledge certifying they will not boycott Israel as a condition of receiving any state government contract.

25+ states

Divestment Mandates

State pension funds are required by law to divest from any company that boycotts Israel or Israeli settlements.

20+ states

Settlement Protections

Anti-boycott protections extend to Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank — territories considered illegal under international law.

17 states

“These laws are not designed to prevent discrimination — they're designed to discriminate against disfavored political expression.”

— American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)

Sources: ACLU, Human Rights Watch, Palestine Legal, Newsweek

The IHRA Weapon


The IHRA adopted a “working definition of antisemitism” in 2016. It was explicitly labeled “non-legally binding.” But governments are codifying it into law anyway.

7 of 11illustrative examples specifically target criticism of Israel

Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter, has publicly opposed its use in legislation, saying it was never intended to police campus speech.

1,200+ Jewish academics signed an open letter opposing codification.

Jan 2025

Harvard Forced to Adopt IHRA

Harvard agreed to adopt the IHRA definition as part of a lawsuit settlement.

Jan 2026

NYC Mayor Mamdani Revoked IHRA

Revoked the city's adoption, calling it a threat to free speech.

Sources: Responsible Statecraft, IMEU, DAWN, The Guardian

Campus Crackdowns


American universities have become ground zero for suppression of Palestine solidarity speech.

Arrests & Suspensions

Students arrested, suspended, and expelled for Palestine solidarity protests at Columbia, UCLA, UT Austin, and dozens of other universities.

Professor Targeting

Professors investigated, disciplined, or denied tenure for criticizing Israeli policy. Canary Mission and other blacklist sites publish dossiers on academics who speak out.

Donor Pressure

Billionaire donors threaten to pull funding from universities that allow Palestine solidarity events. Several university presidents have resigned under this pressure.

The Chilling Effect

Widespread self-censorship among students and academics who fear professional consequences for speaking on Palestine.

Sources: Palestine Legal, ACLU, The Intercept, The Guardian

The Contradiction


CountryUS Anti-Boycott LawsCan Americans Boycott?
RussiaNoneYes
ChinaNoneYes
Saudi ArabiaNoneYes
IranNoneYes
North KoreaNoneYes
Israel35+ state lawsNo (35+ states)

During apartheid South Africa, boycotts were celebrated as an exercise in democratic values. Today, using the same nonviolent tool against Israeli policy is punishable by law in the majority of American states.

Jewish Critics of IHRA Codification


Antisemitism is real and must be fought. But criticism of a government's policies is not hatred of a people. Using antisemitism accusations to silence criticism weakens the fight against real antisemitism.

The definition was never intended to be a tool to target or chill speech on a college campus. Weaponizing it turns the definition into a tool against the very values it was meant to protect.

Kenneth SternLead drafter of the IHRA definition

Anti-boycott laws are a direct attack on our First Amendment rights. As Jews, we know that the right to protest injustice — including through boycotts — is fundamental to a free society.

Jewish Voice for PeaceJewish anti-occupation organization

We are scholars who study antisemitism, the Holocaust, and related subjects. We write to express our firm opposition to the codification of the IHRA definition of antisemitism into law, regulation, or official policy. It risks chilling speech and undermining academic freedom.

1,200+ Jewish AcademicsOpen letter opposing IHRA codification

Frequently Asked Questions


What are anti-BDS laws and how many states have them?

Anti-BDS laws are state-level legislation that penalizes individuals, businesses, or organizations that boycott Israel. As of 2026, 35+ US states have enacted some form of anti-boycott legislation. These laws take two primary forms: public contract bans (requiring companies to certify they will not boycott Israel as a condition of receiving government contracts) and divestment mandates (requiring state pension funds to divest from companies that boycott Israel). 17 of these states explicitly extend protections to Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, not just Israel proper. The ACLU has challenged these laws in multiple states as violations of First Amendment protections. Sources: ACLU, Palestine Legal, Human Rights Watch.

What is the IHRA definition of antisemitism and why is it controversial?

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) adopted a 'working definition of antisemitism' in 2016. It includes 11 illustrative examples, 7 of which specifically target criticism of Israel — such as calling Israel a racist endeavor, comparing Israeli policy to Nazi policy, or holding Israel to standards not applied to other nations. The definition was explicitly labeled 'non-legally binding,' but governments and institutions are codifying it into law and policy anyway. Kenneth Stern, the lead drafter of the definition, has publicly opposed this use, saying it was never intended to police speech on college campuses or restrict academic freedom. Over 1,200 Jewish academics signed a letter opposing codification. Sources: IMEU, Responsible Statecraft, Wikipedia IHRA definition.

Can you be punished for boycotting Israel in the United States?

Yes, in 35+ states. If you are a government contractor, sole proprietor, or small business owner, you may be required to sign a pledge that you will not boycott Israel in order to receive a government contract. In several documented cases, individuals lost contracts or were denied government work for refusing to sign. A proposed federal law, the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, would have made boycotting Israel a federal crime punishable by up to $1 million in fines and 20 years in prison — though this specific provision was later amended after public backlash. No comparable laws exist for any other country. Sources: ACLU, Newsweek, Palestine Legal.

Is criticizing Israel the same as antisemitism?

No. Antisemitism — hatred of Jewish people — is real, dangerous, and must be fought. But criticism of a government's policies is not hatred of a people. This distinction is recognized by major Jewish organizations including Jewish Voice for Peace, IfNotNow, and the 1,200+ Jewish academics who opposed codifying the IHRA definition into law. Kenneth Stern, who drafted the IHRA definition, has explicitly stated that using it to suppress campus speech 'turns the definition into a weapon against the very values it was meant to protect.' Conflating legitimate political criticism with antisemitism actually weakens the fight against real antisemitism by diluting the term. Sources: Jewish Voice for Peace, IfNotNow, Kenneth Stern (The Guardian), DAWN.

Does any other country have this level of legal protection in US law?

No. Israel is the only foreign country for which US states have enacted laws penalizing boycotts. There are no anti-boycott laws for Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, or any other nation. During apartheid South Africa, boycotts were a central tool of the anti-apartheid movement and were protected as free speech. The asymmetry is without precedent: 35+ state legislatures have passed laws protecting one specific foreign government from the nonviolent political expression of American citizens. Sources: ACLU, Human Rights Watch, Palestine Legal.

Sources


ACLU: Anti-BDS law challenges, First Amendment analysisaclu.org

Human Rights Watch: Anti-boycott legislation reportshrw.org

Palestine Legal: Legal threats and censorship documentationpalestinelegal.org

IMEU: IHRA definition analysis and historyimeu.org

Responsible Statecraft: IHRA weaponization reportingresponsiblestatecraft.org

DAWN: Democracy for the Arab World Now — free speech analysisdawnmena.org

Newsweek: Israel Anti-Boycott Act reportingnewsweek.com

The Guardian: Kenneth Stern op-eds on IHRA misusetheguardian.com

Jewish Voice for Peace: Anti-boycott law opposition statementsjewishvoiceforpeace.org

IfNotNow: Jewish opposition to anti-BDS legislationifnotnow.org

Continue the Investigation