Image by Wikimedia

Dear Editor,

In his op-ed on legislation that counters the BDS movement, JStreet’s Jeremy Ben-Ami gets it right when he describes the odious BDS movement, but wrong when he describes legislation that responds to it.

Ben-Ami is correct to note the “one-sided and unbalanced politics” that inform the BDS movement and its failure to acknowledge Israeli rights and interests or even to put forward a viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, just “an end of the state of Israel.” He also properly stresses the importance of respecting and protecting our First Amendment freedoms. However, Ben-Ami mischaracterizes anti-BDS legislation.

Forwarding the News

Thoughtful, balanced reporting from the Forward and around the web, bringing you updated news and analysis each day.

Terms(Required)

I agree to the Forward's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Email(Required)

The legislation that has been enacted in 24 states — with more to come — addresses economic activity and discrimination based on national origin. It expresses the will of state governments not to invest in or contract with companies that boycott Israel; individuals remain free to boycott whomever they choose. The two examples that Ben-Ami gives are widely seen as enforcement misapplications of the laws of Kansas and Texas by over-zealous local municipal officials. It is disingenuous to use them as a “straw man” against legislation that combats discrimination against Israeli businesses without impacting the rights of individuals to engage in protected speech.

The proposed federal legislation cited by Ben-Ami would merely apply existing anti-boycott legislation, which for over 40 years has prohibited boycotts by foreign nations, to intergovernmental bodies like the UN. Again, the federal legislation would not prohibit a UN bureaucrat from boycotting Israel on her own time; it would simply prohibit a company that is being pressured by the UN to boycott Israelis from doing so.

Advancing US economic ties with our ally Israel is smart, effective policy — and hardly “un-American.”

Supporters of an independent Palestinian state living side-by-side in peace and harmony with Israel must redouble efforts to help the parties achieve a lasting peace. As long as the BDS movement advances unilateral economic warfare, however, it is the right and obligation of those who oppose BDS and support peace to seek redress in properly constructed legislation that protects First Amendment rights, while serving as a counterweight to discriminatory BDS. The legislation we support does just that.

William C. Daroff is the Senior Vice President for Public Policy & Director of the Washington office of the Jewish Federations of North America.

The Forward is free to read, but it isn’t free to produce

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward.

Now more than ever, American Jews need independent news they can trust, with reporting driven by truth, not ideology. We serve you, not any ideological agenda.

At a time when other newsrooms are closing or cutting back, the Forward has removed its paywall and invested additional resources to report on the ground from Israel and around the U.S. on the impact of the war, rising antisemitism and polarized discourse.

Readers like you make it all possible. Support our work by becoming a Forward Member and connect with our journalism and your community.

This is a great time to support independent Jewish journalism you rely on. Make a gift today!

—  Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

Support our mission to tell the Jewish story fully and fairly.

$90 $180

$360

Other amount