[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 28 (Tuesday, February 13, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H558-H560]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          IGO ANTI-BOYCOTT ACT

  Mr. LAWLER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 3016) to amend the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 to apply the 
provisions of that Act to international governmental organizations, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3016

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``IGO Anti-Boycott Act''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE ANTI-BOYCOTT ACT OF 2018.

       The Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 is amended as follows:
       (1) In section 1772 (50 U.S.C. 4841), by inserting ``, or 
     international governmental organization,'' after ``foreign 
     country'' each place it appears.
       (2) In section 1773 (50 U.S.C. 4842), in subsection 
     (a)(1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting 
     ``or international governmental organization,'' after 
     ``foreign country,'';
       (B) in subparagraph (A), in the first sentence, by 
     inserting ``or international governmental organization'' 
     after ``boycotting country''; and
       (C) in subparagraph (D), in the first sentence, by 
     inserting ``or international governmental organization'' 
     after ``boycotting country''.
       (3) In section 1773(a) (50 U.S.C. 4842(a)), by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(6) Annual report.--The President shall submit to 
     Congress and make available to the public on an annual basis 
     a report that contains--
       ``(A) a list of those foreign countries and international 
     organizations that foster or impose boycotts and with respect 
     to which this section applies; and
       ``(B) a description of those boycotts.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Lawler) and the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Manning) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. LAWLER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on this measure.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LAWLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3016, the IGO Anti-Boycott 
Act, a bill I introduced with my colleague and great friend from New 
Jersey, Congressman Josh Gottheimer, this past spring.
  After Hamas' October 7 massacre of over 1,200 innocent people in 
Israel, including Americans, we need to do everything we can to stand 
with our friend and ally.
  In the south, Israel is fighting a war to dismantle Hamas, whose 
leader said that October 7 was just a rehearsal. In the north, Israel 
is defending itself from missiles and rockets from Iran's deadly proxy 
Hezbollah.
  However, there are many in the world who want to fault Israel, blame 
Israel, and delegitimize Israel for doing what is necessary to protect 
its citizens and its sovereignty.
  One of the most egregious bastions of anti-Israel bias and bigotry is 
the United Nations. We are deeply concerned that the U.N. could 
weaponize its institutions against Israel.
  Years ago, the U.N. Human Rights Council authorized the creation of a 
database of companies doing business beyond Israel's 1949 armistice 
lines. The implications of this were clear: Create a list of companies 
and then boycott them. That list is now published and updated by the 
United Nations.
  Boycotts such as these are contrary to American values and foreign 
policy. It is critical that we protect U.S. companies from being 
coerced into providing information that would facilitate these 
boycotts.
  For over 40 years, it has been illegal for U.S. companies to 
cooperate with foreign boycotts that the United States is not 
participating in. The reason is because foreign countries should not be 
able to use U.S. companies to undermine U.S. foreign policy. These laws 
were passed in response to the Arab League's boycott of Israel.
  Now, the good news is that today, many fewer countries in the Arab 
League are adhering to the boycott of Israel. In fact, some of them 
have normalized relations with Israel, opening trade as well as 
diplomatic ties.
  We are faced with the potential that U.S. companies might be 
pressured to cooperate with this U.N. list and subsequent boycott of 
Israel. If that were to happen, the U.N. would be using U.S. companies 
to undermine U.S. foreign policy. That is simply unacceptable.
  This bill adds four words, ``or international governmental 
organizations,'' to existing anti-boycott law to include organizations 
like the U.N.
  It is my sincere hope that the U.N. will not foster such a boycott 
against Israel as Israel is responding to the deadliest attack on Jews 
since the Holocaust.
  This bill is especially necessary with the constant anti-Israel bias 
emanating from the U.N. Just recently, we confirmed that UNRWA, the 
U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees, has deep ties to 
Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Israeli intelligence recently released reports 
that many UNRWA workers actually worked as Hamas operatives and 
assisted in the October 7 attacks. It is absolutely disgusting that 
employees of a U.N. agency had a role in this attack. We will see now 
what the U.N. does in response to these allegations.
  We cannot stand idly by while our contributions to UNRWA potentially 
aid and abet terrorists. Our support must only go to organizations that 
uplift humanity, not those who undermine peace and security.

[[Page H559]]

  I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this bill today so that 
we can take a stand against the U.N. and other IGOs and the anti-Israel 
bias present at UNHRC and UNRWA. This bill is just a start. The 
American people stand with Israel.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MANNING. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. I rise in strong support of H.R. 3016, the IGO Anti-Boycott 
Act.
  I strongly support legislative efforts to combat international 
boycotts that target U.S. companies engaged in business activities in 
countries friendly to the United States, including Israel. That is why 
I support H.R. 3016, bipartisan legislation introduced by my friend, 
Representative Mike Lawler, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, 
and by my great friend, Representative Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey.
  This legislation reinforces existing anti-boycott laws and U.S. 
policies to combat those international boycotts. I will continue to 
support ways to protect U.S. businesses from being pressured into 
complying with unsanctioned foreign boycotts against Israel.
  It is already U.S. policy, per the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018, which 
H.R. 3016 would amend, to oppose restrictive trade practices and 
boycotts imposed by any foreign countries or entities against Americans 
and countries friendly to the United States, and which discourages or 
prohibits U.S. companies from taking actions to support unsanctioned 
foreign boycotts.

                              {time}  1645

  There are, of course, limitations to what we can do. The United 
States cannot unilaterally stop other countries from adopting policies 
that we do not agree with, nor could other countries prevent the United 
States from adopting policies they do not agree with.
  However, through bodies like the U.N., as a permanent member of the 
U.N. Security Council, the United States is able to use its voice and 
veto to combat policies, including biased and harmful boycott, 
divestment, and sanctions, or BDS, campaigns against our partners and 
allies like Israel.
  Furthermore, policies adopted by international bodies do not bind 
U.S. citizens. Americans are only bound by American law. An act of 
Congress is required for international law to become our law. No 
intergovernmental organization will ever supersede U.S. law or 
sovereignty.
  From the Arab League boycott to the global BDS campaign against 
Israel, Congress has repeatedly stood united in a bipartisan way 
against this hateful campaign to isolate, single out, and economically 
punish the State of Israel. No American citizen or company should be 
coerced into participating in an unsanctioned boycott against Israel or 
any other partner or ally of the United States. That is why I support 
this bill to update the 2018 Anti-Boycott Act.
  Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting 
this measure, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAWLER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MANNING. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Castro).
  Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Madam Speaker, this piece of legislation is a 
bad idea.
  The right to participate in a boycott is an expression of free speech 
and free association that has been enshrined in American law since our 
Nation's founding. This bill would allow the President, any President, 
to compel the speech of Americans. That is unconstitutional and 
dangerous.
  Let me lay out a few scenarios that this bill would enable: An 
international organization calls for a boycott of goods made through 
forced Uyghur labor in China. An American citizen, concerned about the 
ongoing Uyghur genocide vocally expresses support for this boycott and 
participates in it.
  Under this bill, a President could decide that China is a ``friend to 
the United States'' and penalize one of our own fellow citizens with a 
$1 million fine and 20 years in prison.
  Under this bill, an American citizen who participates in a European 
Union boycott of goods made in Russian-occupied Ukraine could be jailed 
for 20 years under an American President who was friendly to the 
invasion.
  There are no safeguards under this law. The President has the 
complete power to decide when a country is covered by this law. That, I 
cannot support.
  If an American chooses to participate in such a boycott, it should be 
their decision and theirs alone, not the United States Government's.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation.
  Ms. MANNING. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAWLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, to my colleague from Texas, we accepted one of his 
amendments during the markup to address some of his accountability 
concerns.
  Let's be clear. This is not an anti-First Amendment bill. This bill 
adds four words to existing law. It does absolutely nothing 
unprecedented. It only expands coverage of existing protections to 
include IGOs. The bill is not discriminatory against proponents of the 
BDS movement, rather it prevents discriminatory actions against Israel 
and other countries friendly to the United States so as not to 
undermine U.S. foreign policy.
  IGOs, like the United Nations, continue to impose one-sided and 
biased policies against the State of Israel. Madam Speaker, you can't 
wait until after the fact to protect Israel and the Jewish people, as 
we saw on October 7.
  While the E.U. doesn't maintain a similar blacklist, there have been 
E.U.-based efforts to create one and further other BDS initiatives at 
the E.U. For example, just last year in February of 2022, pro-BDS 
activists launched a campaign to call on the E.U. Commission to propose 
a new law to stop trade with settlements.
  Luckily, the campaign didn't reach the number of signatures it needed 
to be brought before the E.U. Commission.
  Now, let's be clear. The BDS movement is anti-Semitic. The BDS is one 
tactic in a long history of campaigns and efforts to delegitimize and 
isolate the State of Israel. It also applies a double standard to 
Israel. The BDS campaign does not support constructive measures to 
build Israeli-Palestinian engagement, nor does it promote peace 
negotiations or a mutually negotiated two-state solution to the 
conflict. Rather, BDS presents a biased and simplistic approach to the 
complex Israeli-Palestinian conflict positioning this dispute over 
territorial and nationalist claims as the fault of only one party, the 
State of Israel, while ignoring other actors and dynamics such as 
Palestinian-shared responsibility for the continuation of the conflict.
  BDS advocates for self-determination for Palestinians while denying 
to Jews that same right.
  So many of our colleagues who have, for instance, called for cease-
fires say nothing about Hamas' barbaric, horrific, and brutal attacks 
on October 7. The duplicity when I hear some of my colleagues talk 
about this issue is pathetic.
  The BDS movement uses divisive and inaccurate terms like 
``apartheid,'' ``genocide,'' ``settler colonialists,'' and 
``supremacists'' to refer to aspects of Israeli action or policy they 
criticize. This language serves to demonize the Jewish State and those 
who support its very existence. So the intent here is to expand 
existing law to include IGOs. Four words are added to the existing law. 
That is all this bill does.

  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MANNING. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Gottheimer), who is the co-chair of the bipartisan 
Problem Solvers Caucus and a member of the House Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence.
  Mr. GOTTHEIMER. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Manning for her 
leadership on this and so many important issues for our country.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle to join me in passing the IGO Anti-Boycott Act. I am 
particularly honored to have helped introduce this bipartisan 
legislation with my very good friend and fellow Problem Solvers Caucus 
member Mike Lawler from New

[[Page H560]]

York. I am grateful for his leadership as well and the words he has 
just spoken.
  On October 7, the world watched Hamas terrorists invade Israel and 
brutally kidnap, torture, rape, burn alive, and murder innocent babies, 
children, women, men, and the elderly, including dozens of Americans. 
Americans remain hostage to this day.
  This unprovoked war has underscored why I will always stand with 
Israel and support our key democratic ally's right to defend herself 
from those who seek her destruction.
  This bipartisan legislation is a key step to counter anti-Israel bias 
and anti-Semitic BDS movements strung along by enemies of our Nation. 
As my colleagues have said, the BDS movement is anti-Semitic. We must 
move quickly to stop international governmental organizations from 
unfairly and unjustly alienating Israel. It is unacceptable.
  Speaking, as my colleague did, about the United Nations and UNRWA, in 
particular, and what has come out even in the last days about UNRWA--
which is, again, part of the United Nations playing host to a Hamas 
data center--we know that a significant number of Hamas fighters are 
employees at UNWRA. I just want people to understand that funding from 
the United States of America should not be supporting any terrorist 
fighters like those in Hamas. It is totally unacceptable, and that is 
not where dollars from the United States should be going.
  Right now, anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric has spread across 
the country and the world. According to the ADL, between October 7 and 
January 7, there were more than 1,300 instances of anti-Semitic acts 
and expressions of support for terrorism against the State of Israel.
  Today, we have a chance to stand up for our ally, Israel, and to 
stand up against anti-Semitism and all of the disinformation which 
continues to spread around the world on sources like TikTok.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. MANNING. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. GOTTHEIMER. We know that on TikTok, which is supported by the 
Chinese Government, the CCP is continuing to spread disinformation. 
Disinformation is also coming out from many of these organizations. We 
must stand up against it.
  This legislation does nothing to violate the First Amendment. In 
fact, the importance of being able to stand strong with the First 
Amendment is what allows legislation like this to make it to the floor 
in Congress. Leadership from Mr. Lawler and others and the excellent 
work here of Ms. Manning is the kind of leadership that is critical.
  So, Madam Speaker, I, once again, urge my colleagues to vote for and 
help pass the Anti-Boycott Act. We must stand strong up against Hamas.
  Mr. LAWLER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MANNING. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
for the purpose of closing.
  Madam Speaker, I support this bill and the underlying provision of 
law it seeks to amend which works to protect U.S. businesses from being 
targeted by foreign boycotts, particularly against nations friendly to 
the United States like Israel.
  Madam Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting H.R. 
3016, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LAWLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, I thank my Democratic co-lead, Congressman Josh 
Gottheimer of New Jersey, who is the co-chair of the Problem Solvers 
Caucus, and all of our bipartisan cosponsors for working with me on 
this important bill to update our anti-boycott laws and to respond to 
potential threats facing the United States and our ally, Israel. We 
must stand with our ally Israel and not allow rampant, 
institutionalized anti-Israel bias and bigotry at the United Nations to 
delegitimize the State of Israel.
  Madam Speaker, I urge all of our Members to vote in favor of H.R. 
3016, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my good 
friend Mr. Lawler for authoring the IGO Anti-Boycott Act, which amends 
the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 to apply its provisions also to 
international governmental organizations.
  When this bill becomes law, it will prevent U.S. companies from 
supporting boycotts of U.S. allies if those boycotts are promoted or 
imposed by intergovernmental organizations.
  What is at issue here are boycotts of Israel organized by the 
antisemitic Boycott, Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement, has enlisted 
the United Nations and European Union into its attempt to blacklist 
Israel--really to make Israel into a pariah state.
  I thank Mr. Lawler as this bill will be a very effective tool in the 
global fight against antisemitism.
  As to the UN's blacklist, meant to be an authoritative guide to anti-
Israel boycotters, it lists companies operating inside disputed 
territories--but the UN provides no similar list for any other disputed 
territory in the world. This is a clear double standard against 
Israel--it fails Natan Sharansky's ``3Ds'' test according to which we 
can see the antisemitism of actions toward Israel that apply a double 
standard against Israel, seek to delegitimize it, or demonize it.
  In the last 9 months I have chaired or co-chaired three hearings on 
the United Nations and its pervasive antisemitism. We have heard the 
testimony and seen the documentation. Make no mistake, antisemitic 
bigotry is at the root of the UN's hostility to Israel, which is ugly, 
evil, and manifests in almost every UN entity.
  The United Nations is unquestionably the world's foremost legitimizer 
of antisemitism, including in its most virulent and violent forms. The 
monstrous and genocidal atrocities we have seen pouring out of Gaza 
since October 7 are antisemitic hate crimes, the logical consequence of 
the unbridled antisemitism fomented and enabled by the United Nations.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Lawler) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 3016, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________