The House debated H.R. 4795, the Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act, which would bar colleges participating in federal student aid from engaging in boycotts of Israel and require schools receiving foreign-education funding to certify that students and faculty can join programs in Israel on equal terms. Republicans including Tim Walberg and Virginia Foxx said taxpayer dollars should not support schools that boycott Israel, and that the bill combats discrimination against Jewish and Israeli students. Democrats including Bobby Scott, Rashida Tlaib, and Joaquin Castro argued no American college has adopted such a boycott, and said the bill threatens free speech and academic freedom by penalizing protected boycott activity. The bill passed on a recorded vote of 237 to 169.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .
“Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1499, I call up the bill (H.R. 4795) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an institution that participates in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel from being eligible for certain funds under that Act, to require an institution that participates in certain programs under that Act to certify that students are not unreasonably obstructed from participating in academic programs in Israel, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House. The Clerk read the title of the bill.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1499, I call up the bill (H.R. 4795) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit an institution that participates in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel from being eligible for certain funds under that Act, to require an institution that participates in certain programs under that Act to certify that students are not unreasonably obstructed from participating in academic programs in Israel, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House. The Clerk read the title of the bill.
“I want Congress to pass this bill. It stops colleges that get federal money from boycotting Israel or cutting ties with Israeli schools. These boycotts unfairly target an American ally and lead to treating Jewish people badly on campus. Tax dollars should not fund schools that discriminate against Israel.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4795, Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act. In recent years, we have seen campaigns to boycott Israel spread across American campuses. These campaigns have pressured colleges and universities to cut financial, commercial, and academic ties with Israeli companies and institutions. That can mean restricting study abroad opportunities, research partnerships, academic exchanges, conferences, and other programs involving Israel. We cannot ignore the role these campaigns have played in fueling the alarming rise of anti-Semitism on college campuses. It is no coincidence that some of the largest supporters of these campaigns have applauded the October 7 attacks and continue to use anti-Semitic language. The Boycott, Divest and Sanctions, or BDS, movement singles out and demonizes Israel. It rejects the truth that Israel is a close friend and strategic partner of the United States. Our universities should not use taxpayer- funded Federal programs to discriminate against Israeli students, faculty, institutions, or businesses simply because they are Israeli. H.R. 4795 would prohibit participating institutions from engaging in boycotts of Israel that are not based on legitimate business reasons. It would also require colleges and universities to treat academic opportunities involving Israel the same as those involving other countries, ensuring Israeli students and faculty have the same access to academic programs and opportunities as their peers from around the world. This is about fairness. It is about justice. It is about protecting academic freedom. It is about accountability for Federal taxpayer dollars. The Federal Government provides significant support to higher education. American taxpayers should not be funding institutions that utilize Federal programs while simultaneously pursuing discriminatory boycotts or unequal academic treatment based solely on ties to Israel. H.R. 4795 passed the committee with bipartisan support, 24-9. That vote reflects what should be an important bipartisan consensus. Our institutions of higher education should be welcoming places for scholarship and exchange, not hotbeds of anti-Semitism and discrimination. I hope the floor vote reflects this principle. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4795 and send a clear message that academic and economic freedom must be protected on our campuses. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4795, Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act. In recent years, we have seen campaigns to boycott Israel spread across American campuses. These campaigns have pressured colleges and universities to cut financial, commercial, and academic ties with Israeli companies and institutions. That can mean restricting study abroad opportunities, research partnerships, academic exchanges, conferences, and other programs involving Israel. We cannot ignore the role these campaigns have played in fueling the alarming rise of anti-Semitism on college campuses. It is no coincidence that some of the largest supporters of these campaigns have applauded the October 7 attacks and continue to use anti-Semitic language. The Boycott, Divest and Sanctions, or BDS, movement singles out and demonizes Israel. It rejects the truth that Israel is a close friend and strategic partner of the United States. Our universities should not use taxpayer- funded Federal programs to discriminate against Israeli students, faculty, institutions, or businesses simply because they are Israeli. H.R. 4795 would prohibit participating institutions from engaging in boycotts of Israel that are not based on legitimate business reasons. It would also require colleges and universities to treat academic opportunities involving Israel the same as those involving other countries, ensuring Israeli students and faculty have the same access to academic programs and opportunities as their peers from around the world. This is about fairness. It is about justice. It is about protecting academic freedom. It is about accountability for Federal taxpayer dollars. The Federal Government provides significant support to higher education. American taxpayers should not be funding institutions that utilize Federal programs while simultaneously pursuing discriminatory boycotts or unequal academic treatment based solely on ties to Israel. H.R. 4795 passed the committee with bipartisan support, 24-9. That vote reflects what should be an important bipartisan consensus. Our institutions of higher education should be welcoming places for scholarship and exchange, not hotbeds of anti-Semitism and discrimination. I hope the floor vote reflects this principle. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4795 and send a clear message that academic and economic freedom must be protected on our campuses. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
“I want members to vote against this bill. No American college is boycotting Israel, so this bill tries to fix a problem that does not exist. It also threatens free speech and academic freedom.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, we find ourselves here, again, purportedly to address anti-Semitism in American higher education. While we should be able to agree that there is no place in higher education for anti- Semitism, the fact is my colleagues on the other side have been curiously quiet, or selectively quiet, about addressing anti-Semitism when it actually does occur. Recall when President Trump declared that there were fine people on both sides when a bunch of White supremacists and their Unite the Right rally marched on the University of Virginia’s campus chanting: ``Jews will not replace us.’’ My colleagues on the other side were also silent as numerous reports regarding chapters of the College Republicans openly promoted their hated of Jewish people among other groups. All the while this has been going on, my colleagues have not told the President to stop firing lawyers at the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education, the agency responsible for investigating claims of anti-Semitism in education. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are certainly mum about how this administration is dismissing Title VI disparate impact analysis, the very tool necessary to address practices and policies that may appear facially neutral but, in fact, discriminate against protected classes under the law. I have not heard them comment on the whistleblower allegations, and many investigations into anti-Semitism on college campuses, led by the Department of Justice’s Anti-Semitism Task Force, were based not on fact patterns or legal analysis but political priorities. With that said, we have the bill before us, the so-called Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act, which would amend the Higher Education Act by imposing new conditions on colleges and universities that receive higher education funding. Under the bill, institutions receiving Title IV Federal student aid would be legally required to certify that they are not engaged in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel. I will begin with an important distinction: there is a difference between actions, or views of students, or even recognized student organizations and the official policy of the colleges and universities they attend. Students have the right to express their political views, but that does not mean that their university has adopted those views, such as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, or BDS, movement. We have yet to see a single college or university in the United States adopt the BDS movement or institutional boycott policies contemplated in the bill. Simply put, the bill does not address any ongoing or existing higher education policy boycotting Israel. Nonetheless, this would create new Federal requirements intended to prevent institutions from adopting such policies in the future. Moreover, as we examine the bill, Members should be careful to consider how these Federal requirements would operate in practice, the potential of negative effect on institutions receiving Federal funds, and whether the bill is misusing the power that we have from the Constitution’s Spending Clause to illegally sanction First Amendment- protected speech, particularly those of students. As written, the bill presents serious First Amendment problems and improperly limits academic freedom. I had hoped these problems could have been resolved before we got to the floor, but they weren’t, so I will be opposing the bill. For these reasons, I ask Members to vote ``no,’’ and I reserve the balance of my time.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, we find ourselves here, again, purportedly to address anti-Semitism in American higher education. While we should be able to agree that there is no place in higher education for anti- Semitism, the fact is my colleagues on the other side have been curiously quiet, or selectively quiet, about addressing anti-Semitism when it actually does occur. Recall when President Trump declared that there were fine people on both sides when a bunch of White supremacists and their Unite the Right rally marched on the University of Virginia’s campus chanting: ``Jews will not replace us.’’ My colleagues on the other side were also silent as numerous reports regarding chapters of the College Republicans openly promoted their hated of Jewish people among other groups. All the while this has been going on, my colleagues have not told the President to stop firing lawyers at the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education, the agency responsible for investigating claims of anti-Semitism in education. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are certainly mum about how this administration is dismissing Title VI disparate impact analysis, the very tool necessary to address practices and policies that may appear facially neutral but, in fact, discriminate against protected classes under the law. I have not heard them comment on the whistleblower allegations, and many investigations into anti-Semitism on college campuses, led by the Department of Justice’s Anti-Semitism Task Force, were based not on fact patterns or legal analysis but political priorities. With that said, we have the bill before us, the so-called Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act, which would amend the Higher Education Act by imposing new conditions on colleges and universities that receive higher education funding. Under the bill, institutions receiving Title IV Federal student aid would be legally required to certify that they are not engaged in a nonexpressive commercial boycott of Israel. I will begin with an important distinction: there is a difference between actions, or views of students, or even recognized student organizations and the official policy of the colleges and universities they attend. Students have the right to express their political views, but that does not mean that their university has adopted those views, such as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, or BDS, movement. We have yet to see a single college or university in the United States adopt the BDS movement or institutional boycott policies contemplated in the bill. Simply put, the bill does not address any ongoing or existing higher education policy boycotting Israel. Nonetheless, this would create new Federal requirements intended to prevent institutions from adopting such policies in the future. Moreover, as we examine the bill, Members should be careful to consider how these Federal requirements would operate in practice, the potential of negative effect on institutions receiving Federal funds, and whether the bill is misusing the power that we have from the Constitution’s Spending Clause to illegally sanction First Amendment- protected speech, particularly those of students. As written, the bill presents serious First Amendment problems and improperly limits academic freedom. I had hoped these problems could have been resolved before we got to the floor, but they weren’t, so I will be opposing the bill. For these reasons, I ask Members to vote ``no,’’ and I reserve the balance of my time.
“I want the House to pass this bill. It stops federal money from going to colleges that boycott Israel. These boycotts harm Israel and treat Jewish and Israeli students badly. American taxpayers should not fund this discrimination.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 4795, bipartisan legislation to combat anti-Semitic, discriminatory commercial and academic boycotts of Israel. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Walberg for yielding me time, and I thank him for advancing this critical bill out of committee. I also thank Ranking Member Scott for his vote in committee to advance the bill on a bipartisan basis. In addition, I also thank the coauthor of this bill, Representative Gottheimer of New Jersey, for his tireless work on this bipartisan achievement. I thank the groups that we worked with and those that support this legislation, the American Jewish Committee and the Combat Antisemitism Movement, for their steadfast support. Mr. Speaker, for decades now, the State of Israel, Israelis, and the people of Jewish faith have been internationally subjected to deplorable boycotts of their identity, their livelihoods, and their vitality. As others have stated, these boycotts are anti-Semitic in their design and discriminatory in their effect, and after October 7, universities have become the epicenters of these campaigns. Let me just quote the cofounder of the modern BDS movement, Omar Barghouti, emphasis mine: ``The ending of Israeli control in the territories is but the first stage of the road to fulfilling the vision of the dismantling of Israel.’’ You heard that correctly, ``the dismantling of Israel,’’ as stated by the founder of this deplorable movement. I want every Member of the House that is about to vote on this measure to reckon with this fact: the very founder of the BDS movement wants to dismantle the Jewish state. That is why the American Jewish Committee has characterized BDS leadership as seeking nothing less than the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. Every Member here should let that sink in and every Member should understand that this bill represents the House’s opportunity to stop this anti-Semitic, discriminatory, and inhuman campaign from being fueled by American taxpayers and stop it in its tracks. Commercial and academic boycotts like the ones we see, when fueled by taxpayer funds, represent concrete discrimination against the people’s national origin. They are discriminating against people of the Jewish faith. They result in discrimination against and marginalizing of Israeli students. No matter how you slice it, these anti-Semitic boycotts should have no place in higher education and deserve zero intersection with the Federal Government. Now, let me speak to the chief argument from opponents of this bill: that these boycotts are illusionary, nonevents, or they haven’t yet been actualized by administrators, so there is no reason to address possible taxpayer funding. These boycotts are manifest. They are coordinated. They are real. They marginalize Jewish students. They harm Israel, Israelis, and Jewish students economically. Case in point, the Evergreen State College in Washington, at the administrative level, reached an agreement to address divestment from companies that profit from the ``occupation of Palestinian territories.’’ You can read this commitment to boycott and divest from Israel online as we speak. The Committee on Education and Workforce’s investigation last Congress revealed that faculty members and Northwestern’s provost-- administrators, mind you--were openly willing to appease encampment organizers in their efforts to demand that the university boycott Sabra hummus. These demands were only rejected after Congress threw its full weight and investigative power against such appeasements. The lack of successful commercial boycotts isn’t due to a lack of trying. During the 2023-2024 academic year, at least 86 BDS resolutions were considered across graduate, undergraduate, and professional student organizations and faculty unions. Academic boycotts have a record of taxpayer support. Keep in mind, they can be stealthily executed at the programmatic level and can be accomplished without the expressed support from university administrators. One leading professor at Georgetown’s Title VI supported National Resource Center has actively pursued a full academic boycott of Israel. In 2013, the American Studies Association, the largest academic--”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 4795, bipartisan legislation to combat anti-Semitic, discriminatory commercial and academic boycotts of Israel. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Walberg for yielding me time, and I thank him for advancing this critical bill out of committee. I also thank Ranking Member Scott for his vote in committee to advance the bill on a bipartisan basis. In addition, I also thank the coauthor of this bill, Representative Gottheimer of New Jersey, for his tireless work on this bipartisan achievement. I thank the groups that we worked with and those that support this legislation, the American Jewish Committee and the Combat Antisemitism Movement, for their steadfast support. Mr. Speaker, for decades now, the State of Israel, Israelis, and the people of Jewish faith have been internationally subjected to deplorable boycotts of their identity, their livelihoods, and their vitality. As others have stated, these boycotts are anti-Semitic in their design and discriminatory in their effect, and after October 7, universities have become the epicenters of these campaigns. Let me just quote the cofounder of the modern BDS movement, Omar Barghouti, emphasis mine: ``The ending of Israeli control in the territories is but the first stage of the road to fulfilling the vision of the dismantling of Israel.’’ You heard that correctly, ``the dismantling of Israel,’’ as stated by the founder of this deplorable movement. I want every Member of the House that is about to vote on this measure to reckon with this fact: the very founder of the BDS movement wants to dismantle the Jewish state. That is why the American Jewish Committee has characterized BDS leadership as seeking nothing less than the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. Every Member here should let that sink in and every Member should understand that this bill represents the House’s opportunity to stop this anti-Semitic, discriminatory, and inhuman campaign from being fueled by American taxpayers and stop it in its tracks. Commercial and academic boycotts like the ones we see, when fueled by taxpayer funds, represent concrete discrimination against the people’s national origin. They are discriminating against people of the Jewish faith. They result in discrimination against and marginalizing of Israeli students. No matter how you slice it, these anti-Semitic boycotts should have no place in higher education and deserve zero intersection with the Federal Government. Now, let me speak to the chief argument from opponents of this bill: that these boycotts are illusionary, nonevents, or they haven’t yet been actualized by administrators, so there is no reason to address possible taxpayer funding. These boycotts are manifest. They are coordinated. They are real. They marginalize Jewish students. They harm Israel, Israelis, and Jewish students economically. Case in point, the Evergreen State College in Washington, at the administrative level, reached an agreement to address divestment from companies that profit from the ``occupation of Palestinian territories.’’ You can read this commitment to boycott and divest from Israel online as we speak. The Committee on Education and Workforce’s investigation last Congress revealed that faculty members and Northwestern’s provost-- administrators, mind you--were openly willing to appease encampment organizers in their efforts to demand that the university boycott Sabra hummus. These demands were only rejected after Congress threw its full weight and investigative power against such appeasements. The lack of successful commercial boycotts isn’t due to a lack of trying. During the 2023-2024 academic year, at least 86 BDS resolutions were considered across graduate, undergraduate, and professional student organizations and faculty unions. Academic boycotts have a record of taxpayer support. Keep in mind, they can be stealthily executed at the programmatic level and can be accomplished without the expressed support from university administrators. One leading professor at Georgetown’s Title VI supported National Resource Center has actively pursued a full academic boycott of Israel. In 2013, the American Studies Association, the largest academic--
“I want the House to pass this bill. Some academic groups use taxpayer money to boycott Israel. This bill stops them and protects taxpayers and Jewish students from discrimination.”
“Mr. Speaker, in 2013, the American Studies Association, the largest academic group in the United States, adopted a policy endorsing an academic boycott of Israel. In 2014, six taxpayer-supported NRC directors signed a letter endorsing an academic boycott of Israel. These academic boycotts contravene the purposes of the title VI funding they received. Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on, but now is not the time for talk. The facts are evident. Now is the time for action. This Congress needs to codify this preventive measure to protect students and taxpayers from this disgusting discrimination. Again, I thank Chairman Walberg and Representative Gottheimer for their work on this bipartisan legislation. I urge the Chamber to draw a line in the sand against these harmful campaigns against the State of Israel, Israelis, and our Jewish students at home.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, in 2013, the American Studies Association, the largest academic group in the United States, adopted a policy endorsing an academic boycott of Israel. In 2014, six taxpayer-supported NRC directors signed a letter endorsing an academic boycott of Israel. These academic boycotts contravene the purposes of the title VI funding they received. Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on, but now is not the time for talk. The facts are evident. Now is the time for action. This Congress needs to codify this preventive measure to protect students and taxpayers from this disgusting discrimination. Again, I thank Chairman Walberg and Representative Gottheimer for their work on this bipartisan legislation. I urge the Chamber to draw a line in the sand against these harmful campaigns against the State of Israel, Israelis, and our Jewish students at home.
“I oppose this bill. It attacks free speech and academic freedom by taking away student aid from colleges that boycott Israel.”
“Mr. Speaker, this bill is an attack on free speech and academic freedom, all in the name of defending a genocidal apartheid state. While the Trump administration is stripping universities of their funding, deporting international students, and pressuring universities to shut down their Black and African-American studies departments, Congress is voting today to force universities to pledge their loyalty to what? To a foreign government. That is right. Support the Israeli Government and their war crimes or lose Federal student aid. Boycotts are protected free speech and an important tool for social change, from the civil rights movement to today. Academic boycotts had helped bring down the apartheid state in South Africa, as well as abolish segregation right here at home. This is not about protecting our Jewish neighbors because many of the boycotts and the divestment movements on campuses are led by Jewish students who were yelling: Not in our name. Do you know what this is about? I will show you. This is about protecting an image like this from Israel’s National Security Minister this week. This is what he put up on social media, showing the fate that he has planned for the Palestinian people. What is this? This is an image of Palestinians walking into a gas chamber. This is what students are boycotting. Yet, here we are, punishing them for speaking out against this, speaking out against ethnic cleansing, genocide, and bombings of hospitals, schools, and refugee camps. This bill is a clear assault on higher education for millions of working-class students who depend on Federal student aid to get an education. A vote for this bill is a betrayal of those promising young students, denying them the right to an education. Why? Because they want to save lives, no matter their faith or ethnicity. The Trump administration is committed to dismantling higher education and public education in our country. We all see it, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. First, it is a ban on boycotting an apartheid government state, and then it is going to be a ban on divesting from fossil fuels, or maybe teachers will be banned based on what teachers are teaching now. We need to stand against this attack on academic freedom and stand up for students. They are doing what is right in our history, and I am not going to wait a decade for people to apologize for it, because they are trying to save lives. It is their constitutional right to be able to boycott and run campaigns that are peaceful and saying: Enough is enough. Not with our dime, and not in our name.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, this bill is an attack on free speech and academic freedom, all in the name of defending a genocidal apartheid state. While the Trump administration is stripping universities of their funding, deporting international students, and pressuring universities to shut down their Black and African-American studies departments, Congress is voting today to force universities to pledge their loyalty to what? To a foreign government. That is right. Support the Israeli Government and their war crimes or lose Federal student aid. Boycotts are protected free speech and an important tool for social change, from the civil rights movement to today. Academic boycotts had helped bring down the apartheid state in South Africa, as well as abolish segregation right here at home. This is not about protecting our Jewish neighbors because many of the boycotts and the divestment movements on campuses are led by Jewish students who were yelling: Not in our name. Do you know what this is about? I will show you. This is about protecting an image like this from Israel’s National Security Minister this week. This is what he put up on social media, showing the fate that he has planned for the Palestinian people. What is this? This is an image of Palestinians walking into a gas chamber. This is what students are boycotting. Yet, here we are, punishing them for speaking out against this, speaking out against ethnic cleansing, genocide, and bombings of hospitals, schools, and refugee camps. This bill is a clear assault on higher education for millions of working-class students who depend on Federal student aid to get an education. A vote for this bill is a betrayal of those promising young students, denying them the right to an education. Why? Because they want to save lives, no matter their faith or ethnicity. The Trump administration is committed to dismantling higher education and public education in our country. We all see it, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. First, it is a ban on boycotting an apartheid government state, and then it is going to be a ban on divesting from fossil fuels, or maybe teachers will be banned based on what teachers are teaching now. We need to stand against this attack on academic freedom and stand up for students. They are doing what is right in our history, and I am not going to wait a decade for people to apologize for it, because they are trying to save lives. It is their constitutional right to be able to boycott and run campaigns that are peaceful and saying: Enough is enough. Not with our dime, and not in our name.
“I want the House to pass this bill. Colleges across the country are treating Jewish students badly and boycotting Israel. Taxpayer money should not go to schools that discriminate like this.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4795, the Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act. Anti-Semitism on American campuses is not a fringe problem, and it is not slowing down. Across the United States and our institutions of higher learning, we have seen a concerted and coordinated effort to isolate Jewish students and faculty. In fact, as we have heard, the Combat Antisemitism Movement reported 531 incidents in the U.S. on college and university campuses in 2025. I am incredibly proud of the work that the Education and Workforce Committee has done to combat the spread of this vile ideology, and American taxpayers’ dollars should not go to subsidize universities that are actively singling out one of our closest allies to discriminate against them. This isn’t an issue over protests or slogans. In too many instances, this hatred has become a form of institutional discrimination supported by our colleges and universities. When that line is crossed, Congress has every right to intervene and demand that if you receive Federal dollars, there are basic standards that must be met. I am grateful for Dr. Foxx and her leadership in this space, and I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes’’ on this measure.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4795, the Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act. Anti-Semitism on American campuses is not a fringe problem, and it is not slowing down. Across the United States and our institutions of higher learning, we have seen a concerted and coordinated effort to isolate Jewish students and faculty. In fact, as we have heard, the Combat Antisemitism Movement reported 531 incidents in the U.S. on college and university campuses in 2025. I am incredibly proud of the work that the Education and Workforce Committee has done to combat the spread of this vile ideology, and American taxpayers’ dollars should not go to subsidize universities that are actively singling out one of our closest allies to discriminate against them. This isn’t an issue over protests or slogans. In too many instances, this hatred has become a form of institutional discrimination supported by our colleges and universities. When that line is crossed, Congress has every right to intervene and demand that if you receive Federal dollars, there are basic standards that must be met. I am grateful for Dr. Foxx and her leadership in this space, and I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes’’ on this measure.
“I want the House to vote against this bill. It takes away federal college aid from schools and students if a university boycotts Israel or settlements in the West Bank. Boycotts are a form of free speech protected by the Constitution. This bill hurts American students to protect actions by a foreign government.”
“Mr. Speaker, this bill is a bad idea. It tramples on the rights of Americans in order to protect a foreign government from the consequences of its own actions. Let me give you some context. The West Bank is currently experiencing the worst year of settler violence ever recorded. Israeli settlers have committed violence, terrorism, and many other things against Palestinians, with the goal of driving them out of the lands they have lived in for generations. It is an ethnic cleansing. They have assaulted and killed Palestinian Americans and laid siege to their homes. The Israeli Government has turned a blind eye to this violence and, in many cases, has actively supported it, protecting the criminals and not the victims. The same government has orchestrated a record expansion of illegal Israeli settlements, a violation of international law and a crime against the Palestinians who live there. Americans see this. The world sees this. Yet, what is the priority of our House of Representatives right now? It is not to stop the violence, not to stop the displacement, and not to protect the children. The priority of this House today is a bill that threatens to take Federal student aid away from American citizens and to protect this activity in these settlements. Don’t let anyone convince you that this bill is about anti-Semitism or even just about Israel. The bill’s language is written to include Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. It is in defense of an illegal act by a foreign government, and the victims will be American students. If this House should be debating anything on this issue, it should be sanctions on these settlements and not a bill that protects them. Let me lay out a scenario so that we understand exactly how this piece of legislation would work. If a university in Texas decided tomorrow to stop doing business with a company in South Carolina, California, or Idaho, it would face no consequences under American law. Make the same decision about Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, and this bill strips American students of their Pell grants and American veterans of their hard- earned benefits. This bill holds American students’ education hostage to protect a foreign government. We would be doing this in flagrant violation of the United States Constitution. In the landmark decision NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., the Supreme Court held that a politically motivated boycott is protected expression under the First Amendment. This isn’t an obscure case. It is the reason the sponsors of the bill wrote the word ``nonexpressive’’ into the text. Yet, every example that the sponsors point to is plainly political. A boycott is a political act. It is protected under the First Amendment, and you don’t have to even agree with the boycott to support an American’s right to engage in it. Every Member of this body raised their hand and swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and I urge every Member of this body today to take that oath seriously and vote against this bill.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, this bill is a bad idea. It tramples on the rights of Americans in order to protect a foreign government from the consequences of its own actions. Let me give you some context. The West Bank is currently experiencing the worst year of settler violence ever recorded. Israeli settlers have committed violence, terrorism, and many other things against Palestinians, with the goal of driving them out of the lands they have lived in for generations. It is an ethnic cleansing. They have assaulted and killed Palestinian Americans and laid siege to their homes. The Israeli Government has turned a blind eye to this violence and, in many cases, has actively supported it, protecting the criminals and not the victims. The same government has orchestrated a record expansion of illegal Israeli settlements, a violation of international law and a crime against the Palestinians who live there. Americans see this. The world sees this. Yet, what is the priority of our House of Representatives right now? It is not to stop the violence, not to stop the displacement, and not to protect the children. The priority of this House today is a bill that threatens to take Federal student aid away from American citizens and to protect this activity in these settlements. Don’t let anyone convince you that this bill is about anti-Semitism or even just about Israel. The bill’s language is written to include Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. It is in defense of an illegal act by a foreign government, and the victims will be American students. If this House should be debating anything on this issue, it should be sanctions on these settlements and not a bill that protects them. Let me lay out a scenario so that we understand exactly how this piece of legislation would work. If a university in Texas decided tomorrow to stop doing business with a company in South Carolina, California, or Idaho, it would face no consequences under American law. Make the same decision about Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, and this bill strips American students of their Pell grants and American veterans of their hard- earned benefits. This bill holds American students’ education hostage to protect a foreign government. We would be doing this in flagrant violation of the United States Constitution. In the landmark decision NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., the Supreme Court held that a politically motivated boycott is protected expression under the First Amendment. This isn’t an obscure case. It is the reason the sponsors of the bill wrote the word ``nonexpressive’’ into the text. Yet, every example that the sponsors point to is plainly political. A boycott is a political act. It is protected under the First Amendment, and you don’t have to even agree with the boycott to support an American’s right to engage in it. Every Member of this body raised their hand and swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and I urge every Member of this body today to take that oath seriously and vote against this bill.
“I oppose this bill. It hurts free speech and academic freedom by punishing colleges that boycott Israel or its settlements.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for the purpose of closing. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a statement from J Street, which says in part: ``This means infringing on constitutionally protected free speech and academic freedom by penalizing institutions (and thereby unrelated research) for participation in certain boycott or divestment efforts targeted at Israel or Israeli settlements. There is a fundamental distinction between the State of Israel and the territory that it occupies over the Green Line, and penalizing universities for expressing their opposition to activities that further annexation sets a dangerous precedent.’’”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for the purpose of closing. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a statement from J Street, which says in part: ``This means infringing on constitutionally protected free speech and academic freedom by penalizing institutions (and thereby unrelated research) for participation in certain boycott or divestment efforts targeted at Israel or Israeli settlements. There is a fundamental distinction between the State of Israel and the territory that it occupies over the Green Line, and penalizing universities for expressing their opposition to activities that further annexation sets a dangerous precedent.’’
“I am sharing a statement from a teachers union that opposes this bill. They say it harms academic freedom, student safety, and access to college.”
“Mr. Speaker, I also include in the Record a statement from the American Federation of Teachers which says in part: ``The AFT has long fought for academic freedom, the safety and dignity of all students and educators, and policies that keep higher education accessible. H.R. 4795 undermines those goals rather than advancing them.’’”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I also include in the Record a statement from the American Federation of Teachers which says in part: ``The AFT has long fought for academic freedom, the safety and dignity of all students and educators, and policies that keep higher education accessible. H.R. 4795 undermines those goals rather than advancing them.’’
“I want the House to vote against this bill. No American college has officially boycotted Israel. A student or teacher sharing an opinion is not the same as an official college policy. We should stop people from treating Jewish people badly, but we should not violate free speech to do it.”
“Mr. Speaker, I will close by returning to the central point: that we must distinguish between student or faculty expression in university policy. A student organization or individual faculty member supporting BDS is not the same thing as the university administration adopting BDS as policy. A faculty member expressing a political opinion is not the same thing as the institution imposing a boycott. Importantly, we have yet to see a single American college or university adopting BDS in the way the bill suggests. Furthermore, we know the bill is intended to target the BDS movement. Yet it is not clear whether a school that even joined the BDS movement would be covered by the text of the bill. The bill implicates ``nonexpressive boycotts’’ as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro) just pointed out. If it is expressive, it is protected by the First Amendment. BDS by its very nature is designed to express disapproval of the actions of the State of Israel. If a college or university came out and publicly said it was joining BDS, most people would agree that that announcement and any activity that flowed from it would clearly be expressive, and therefore, out of the scope of the bill. As an expressive activity, the statement would be protected under the First Amendment, and therefore, the First Amendment would protect the funding from being removed. But, again, no college or university has embraced the BDS movement anyway. We should combat anti-Semitism wherever it occurs, but we should not do so by punishing protected speech or conflating students’ views with university policies. For those reasons I urge a ``no’’ vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I will close by returning to the central point: that we must distinguish between student or faculty expression in university policy. A student organization or individual faculty member supporting BDS is not the same thing as the university administration adopting BDS as policy. A faculty member expressing a political opinion is not the same thing as the institution imposing a boycott. Importantly, we have yet to see a single American college or university adopting BDS in the way the bill suggests. Furthermore, we know the bill is intended to target the BDS movement. Yet it is not clear whether a school that even joined the BDS movement would be covered by the text of the bill. The bill implicates ``nonexpressive boycotts’’ as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro) just pointed out. If it is expressive, it is protected by the First Amendment. BDS by its very nature is designed to express disapproval of the actions of the State of Israel. If a college or university came out and publicly said it was joining BDS, most people would agree that that announcement and any activity that flowed from it would clearly be expressive, and therefore, out of the scope of the bill. As an expressive activity, the statement would be protected under the First Amendment, and therefore, the First Amendment would protect the funding from being removed. But, again, no college or university has embraced the BDS movement anyway. We should combat anti-Semitism wherever it occurs, but we should not do so by punishing protected speech or conflating students’ views with university policies. For those reasons I urge a ``no’’ vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
“I want the House to pass this bill. It stops colleges from getting federal money if they boycott Israel. American tax dollars should not go to schools that treat Israel or Israeli students unfairly, especially when more people on campus are treating Jewish people badly.”
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is about a simple principle: Our colleges and universities should not discriminate against Israel, Israeli institutions, or Israeli students; and Federal taxpayer dollars should never support institutions that engage in such discrimination. Academic freedom means students and faculty should be free to study, conduct research, collaborate, and exchange ideas without boycotts closing doors based on nationality. H.R. 4795 protects that principle. It ensures that colleges participating in Federal higher education programs do not engage in certain unjustified commercial boycotts of Israel and that academic opportunities involving Israel are treated fairly and equally. This is particularly important at a time when Jewish students and faculty are facing an alarming rise in anti-Semitism on American campuses. Our universities should be places where every student can learn without fear of discrimination or hostility and where academic partnerships are evaluated on their merits, not on campaigns that target one country. The United States has a strong and enduring partnership with Israel. Our colleges and universities should not be undermining that relationship while asking American taxpayers to support their institution. H.R. 4795 passed our committee with bipartisan support. Now it is time for the full House to stand for academic freedom, equal treatment, and responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. I thank Representative Virginia Foxx for her leadership on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes’’ on H.R. 4795. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is about a simple principle: Our colleges and universities should not discriminate against Israel, Israeli institutions, or Israeli students; and Federal taxpayer dollars should never support institutions that engage in such discrimination. Academic freedom means students and faculty should be free to study, conduct research, collaborate, and exchange ideas without boycotts closing doors based on nationality. H.R. 4795 protects that principle. It ensures that colleges participating in Federal higher education programs do not engage in certain unjustified commercial boycotts of Israel and that academic opportunities involving Israel are treated fairly and equally. This is particularly important at a time when Jewish students and faculty are facing an alarming rise in anti-Semitism on American campuses. Our universities should be places where every student can learn without fear of discrimination or hostility and where academic partnerships are evaluated on their merits, not on campaigns that target one country. The United States has a strong and enduring partnership with Israel. Our colleges and universities should not be undermining that relationship while asking American taxpayers to support their institution. H.R. 4795 passed our committee with bipartisan support. Now it is time for the full House to stand for academic freedom, equal treatment, and responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. I thank Representative Virginia Foxx for her leadership on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes’’ on H.R. 4795. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
“Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 237, nays 169, not voting 27, as follows: Mr. VEASEY changed his vote from ``yea’’ to ``nay.’’ Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ changed her vote from ``nay’’ to ``yea.’’ So the bill was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Stated for:”
Official Congressional Record
Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 237, nays 169, not voting 27, as follows: Mr. VEASEY changed his vote from ``yea’’ to ``nay.’’ Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ changed her vote from ``nay’’ to ``yea.’’ So the bill was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Stated for:
