Wielding Antidiscrimination Law to Suppress the Movement for Palestinian Rights, Dylan Saba, Harvard Law Review, 2020.

This Harvard Law Review note argues that anti-BDS laws and related legal strategies misuse antidiscrimination law to suppress Palestinian rights activism, claiming that political boycotts targeting Israeli state policies are being reframed as unlawful discrimination against Jewish or Israeli people.

1. Anti-BDS Laws as Antidiscrimination Law

2. Antidiscrimination Law as a Tool Against Palestine Activism

3. The Political Origins of Anti-BDS Laws

4. BDS as Protected Political Expression

5. The Discrimination Justification Behind Anti-BDS Laws

6. The Discrimination Argument Is Likely Pretextual

7. BDS Does Not Meet Legal Standards for Discrimination

8. Anti-Zionism Is Not Automatically Anti-Semitism

9. Expanded Definitions of Anti-Semitism and Chilling Effects

10. The Broader Danger to Political Boycotts and Protest

⭐ Star Facts

• By 2020, 27 U.S. states had adopted anti-BDS laws, with legislation pending in additional states.
• Many anti-BDS laws require government contractors to certify they are not boycotting Israel.
• Illinois became the first U.S. state to pass an anti-BDS law in 2015.
• The Netanyahu government reportedly devoted $25.5 million to anti-BDS efforts.
• AIPAC was reportedly drafting anti-BDS legislation in the United States as early as 2014.
• In 2015, around 50 organizations reportedly coordinated anti-BDS strategy efforts in the U.S.
• The paper notes that Airbnb reversed its West Bank settlement delisting policy after lawsuits alleging discrimination against Jewish people and Israelis.