Illinois lawmakers face an uphill battle to repeal the state’s anti-BDS law as they challenge restrictions on boycotting Israel and confront powerful political interests.
At a Glance
- Illinois’ 2015 law prohibits state pension funds from investing in companies boycotting Israel, making it the first state to enact such legislation
- Thirty companies are currently on Illinois’ prohibited entity list for boycotting Israel
- Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid and Sen. Mike Porfirio introduced repeal bills that have stalled in committee despite initial support
- Critics argue the law infringes on free speech rights by singling out Israel as the only country protected from boycotts
First-of-its-Kind Ban Faces Scrutiny
Illinois made history in 2015 when it became the first state to pass legislation prohibiting state pension funds from investing in companies that boycott Israel. The law established the Illinois Investment Policy Board to investigate companies’ investment choices related to boycotting Israel, modeling the approach after post-9/11 measures restricting investments in companies doing business with Iran and Sudan. Today, 38 U.S. states have similar laws preventing companies or individuals with anti-Israel stances from receiving government contracts.
The legislation has real financial consequences. Currently, thirty companies appear on Illinois’ prohibited entity list for boycotting Israel. Unilever was added after its subsidiary Ben & Jerry’s stopped selling products in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, while financial services firm Morningstar narrowly avoided state divestment by addressing accusations of anti-Israel bias in its ratings system.
Free Speech Concerns Drive Repeal Efforts
Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid, the first Palestinian American elected to the Illinois legislature, introduced House Bill 2723 to repeal the anti-boycott law, while Sen. Mike Porfirio sponsored companion legislation in the Senate. The bills have garnered attention amid increasing debate about free speech restrictions related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Critics argue the law unfairly targets political expression, as Israel is the only country for which boycotting is specifically penalized.
“This is about the right for people to advocate for what they believe — in this particular case, for human-rights advocacy — without the state telling you what you have to believe and how you have to act.” – Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid.
Supporters of the repeal point to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement’s 20-year history of using non-violent action against the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, drawing parallels to the anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa. They argue economic boycotts are a legitimate form of political expression that should be protected rather than penalized by state law.
Political Obstacles Halt Progress
Despite initially securing support from approximately one-fifth of the Democratic caucus, including leaders of the Latino, Black, and Progressive caucuses, the repeal bills have stalled in committee. Several lawmakers have withdrawn their sponsorship as the political sensitivity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has intensified following recent events in Gaza. The Democratic supermajority in Illinois has yet to leverage its power on this issue.
“Even though it had quite an impressive list of sponsors and cosponsors, it’s a controversial piece of legislation that is likely to engender a lot of debate that most legislators don’t want to vote on, because they either have Jewish or Palestinian constituents, or both.” – Dick Simpson.
Further complicating matters, Gov. J.B. Pritzker may veto any repeal if it passes, particularly as he considers a potential presidential run in 2028. Political analysts suggest many lawmakers are reluctant to cast votes that could alienate constituents on either side of this divisive issue, especially when passage remains unlikely.
Shifting Public Opinion
The repeal effort comes at a time when public opinion in the U.S. regarding Israel is shifting. Polls indicate increasing unfavorable views of Israel and its Prime Minister among American voters. This changing sentiment provides some hope for proponents of the repeal, who see potential for leveraging the Democratic supermajority as public attitudes evolve.
“It is a matter of making sure that Illinois is on the right side of history – not participating in the oppression of the Palestinian people – but it is also about making sure the Illinoisans and companies that do business in Illinois are not being forced and bullied and retaliated against because they chose to stand for human rights.” – Abdelnasser Rashid.
The original sponsor of the 2015 law, Sen. Sara Feigenholtz, continues to defend the legislation, maintaining that it does not curtail free speech. Meanwhile, the pro-Israel group J Street has taken a nuanced position, not opposing boycott initiatives supporting a two-state solution while opposing the broader Global BDS Movement. As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict evolves, so too may the political landscape surrounding this contentious legislation.
