Defeated

This antisemitism redefinition bill requires the use of a distorted definition of antisemitism in hate crimes reporting and sentencing. Criticism of Israel and advocacy for Palestinian rights could be used as evidence of a hate crime or result in more severe sentences. 

The bill amends Arizona law to include antisemitism as one of the categories of discrimination for which the state must collect bias crime statistics, but adopts the IHRA definition of antisemitism, including its problematic contemporary examples, which include “[a]pplying double standards [to Israel] by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation” and “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.” The bill requires courts to consider criticism of Israel that falls within the IHRA definition as an aggravating factor for sentencing in criminal convictions.

This bill is nearly identical to previous versions, HB 2683 and SB 1143, which were defeated in 2020. Civil rights groups and advocates raised concerns over how the definition could be used to chill protected speech, and the bill failed to pass. A related bill (HB 2675) passed in April 2022.

This anti-boycott bill prohibits state contracts with companies, including nonprofits, that boycott Israel or its illegal settlements. Contractors must provide a written certification that they are not and will not for the duration of the contract engage in such boycotts. The bill excludes contracts whose total value is less than $250,000 and contractors with fewer than 10 employees. A similar bill targeting boycotts for Palestinian rights was introduced in 2018 and failed to pass. Related bills: HB 2050, SB 1993.

This anti-boycott bill prohibits state contracts with companies, including nonprofits, that boycott Israel or its illegal settlements. Contractors must provide a written certification that they are not and will not for the duration of the contract engage in such boycotts. The bill excludes contracts whose total value is less than $250,000 and contractors with fewer than 10 employees. A similar bill targeting boycotts for Palestinian rights was introduced in 2018 and failed to pass. A companion bill (SB 1993) passed and will go into effect in July 2022. Related bill: HB 2136. 

This anti-boycott bill requires state contractors to provide a written certification that they will not engage in boycotts of Israel or its illegal settlements. The bill excludes contracts whose total value is less than $10,000. 

This anti-boycott bill prohibits state contracts with entities, including non-profits, that boycott Israel or entities doing business in or with Israel. The prohibition extends to boycotts of entities “authorized, licensed, or organized to do business by the State of Israel,” which would encompass boycotts of Israel’s illegal settlements. Contractors must provide a written certification that they are not and will not for the duration of the contract engage in boycotts of Israel. The bill excludes contracts whose total value is less than $100,000 and contractors that have fewer than 10 full time employees. 

This anti-boycott bill prohibits state contracts with companies, including non-profits, that boycott Israel or entities doing business in or with Israel. The prohibition extends to boycotts of entities “authorized by, licensed by, or organized under the laws of the State of Israel,” which would encompass boycotts of Israel’s illegal settlements. Contractors must provide a written certification that they are not and will not for the duration of the contract engage in boycotts of Israel. The bill excludes contracts whose total value is less than $100,000 and contractors that have fewer than 10 full time employees. 

This non-binding resolution condemns and calls for the censure of Representatives Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for criticizing Israel and calling for accountability for all crimes against humanity, including those committed by the U.S. and Israel. Among the statements called out for condemnation and censure are accusations that Israel has “‘committed human rights abuses,’” that it is an “‘apartheid state’” engaged in “‘ethnic cleansing’” of Palestinians, and that Israel’s military response to rockets fired by Hamas in Gaza were not acts of self-defense – all of which are claims supported by U.N. investigations and human rights organizations. The resolution smears the expression of support for Palestinian rights as resulting in anti-Jewish violence.

This non-binding resolution encourages the University of Illinois Board of Trustees to use the IHRA definition of antisemitism as a basis for recommending policies and actions to address antisemitism on campus. The distorted IHRA definition has been widely criticized for conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism, resulting in the silencing of advocates for Palestinian rights. The resolution asks the Board to report to the Board of Higher Education and the Illinois General Assembly every 180 days on steps being taken to implement such policies, which could include mandating campus training or enforcing a student code of conduct. Relying on the IHRA definition for such policies could turn criticism of Israel into a violation of the student code of conduct.

This anti-boycott bill prohibits state contracts with and state investment—both direct and indirect—in companies that boycott Israel. The bill calls for the creation of a blacklist of restricted companies from which the state must divest and in which it cannot directly invest. The bill excludes indirect investments where it is unlikely that more than 0.05% of the fund’s total investments is invested in blacklisted companies. The bill also prohibits state contracts of any value with entities that boycott Israel, requiring the commissioner of taxation and finance to confirm that the company is not engaged in prohibited boycotts before accepting a bid. This bill expands the scope of New York’s executive order prohibiting state investment in companies that boycott Israel.  

This antisemitism redefinition amendment to the state budget bill adopts the problematic IHRA definition of antisemitism, which has been widely criticized for encompassing nearly all criticism of Israel and circumscribing protected political speech activities. State-level advocates mobilized to ensure that the amendment did not pass out of committee.