ACLU: Bill is a "serious threat to free speech."

[HarmonyRockets]

And some Democrats are still sadly supporting it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-piece-of-pro-israel-legislation-is-a-serious-threat-to-free-speech/2017/07/24/0752d408-7093-11e7-8f39-eeb7d3a2d304_story.html?utm_term=.bd5e6404a1c2

This piece of pro-Israel legislation is a serious threat to free speech

By David Cole and Faiz Shakir July 24 at 6:22 PM

David Cole is national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. Faiz Shakir is national political director of the ACLU.

The right to boycott has a long history in the United States, from the American Revolution to Martin Luther King Jr.’s Montgomery bus boycott to the campaign for divestment from businesses serving apartheid South Africa. Nowadays we celebrate those efforts. But precisely because boycotts are such a powerful form of expression, governments have long sought to interfere with them — from King George III to the police in Alabama, and now to the U.S. Congress.

The Israel Anti-Boycott Act, legislation introduced in the Senate by Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.) and in the House by Peter J. Roskam (R-Ill.), would make it a crime to support or even furnish information about a boycott directed at Israel or its businesses called by the United Nations, the European Union or any other “international governmental organization.” Violations would be punishable by civil and criminal penalties of up to $1 million and 20 years in prison. The American Civil Liberties Union, where we both work, takes no position for or against campaigns to boycott Israel or any other foreign country. But since our organization’s founding in 1920, the ACLU has defended the right to collective action. This bill threatens that right.

The Israel Anti-Boycott Act is designed to stifle efforts to protest Israel’s settlement policies by boycotting businesses in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. The bill’s particular target is the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, a global campaign that seeks to apply economic and political pressure on Israel to comply with international law.

Whether one approves or disapproves of the BDS movement itself, people should have a right to make up their own minds about it. Americans engage in boycotts every day when they decide not to buy from companies whose practices they oppose. Students have boycotted companies that sold clothing manufactured in sweatshops abroad. Environmentalists have boycotted Nestlé for its deforestation practices. By using their power in the marketplace, consumers can act collectively to express their political points of view. There is nothing illegal about such collective action; indeed, it is constitutionally protected.

...

Cardin and other supporters argue that the Israel Anti-Boycott Act targets only commercial activity. In fact, the bill threatens severe penalties against any business or individual who does not purchase goods from Israeli companies operating in the occupied Palestinian territories and who makes it clear — say by posting on Twitter or Facebook — that their reason for doing so is to support a U.N.- or E.U.-called boycott. That kind of penalty does not target commercial trade; it targets free speech and political beliefs. Indeed, the bill would prohibit even the act of giving information to a U.N. body about boycott activity directed at Israel.

[procon]

1. That's just all kinds of wrong.

The state does not have that kind of power. As a free citizen it's my right to decide whether or not I choose to boycott products and companies, and for whatever reason I want to.

[Shrike47]

2. Serious violation of 1st Amendment. It won't survive if passed and they know it.

[Gabi Hayes]

6. Oh? Seen the comp of the SCOTUS recently?

Do you think any of the fascist 5 are going to naysay?

[X_Digger]

3. I hope there's nobody on DU who supports this travesty. n/t

[TomSlick]

4. Sigh.

Why would a Democratic Senator support a bill that is so obviously a violation of the First Amendment? I got it, he's a big supporter of Israel. But really? That's just dumb.

[Gabi Hayes]

7. Duhhh. AIPAC $$$$$

[TomSlick]

10. Yeah well, of course but

This is just dumb. If a Democrat doesn't support the First Amendment, what does he stand for?

[McCamy Taylor]

5. The law as written would prohibit people from posting about the law...

..since it talks about boycotts against Israel in the abstract, meaning that to even suggest such a thing exists somewhere in the known universe would be criminal.

[Gabi Hayes]

8. Can you say USA PATRIOT ACT?

[Gabi Hayes]

9. How many senators voted against that?

1, I'm pretty sure