New Jersey Follows New York And Other States In Anti-BDS Action Regarded As Unconstitutional
On Tuesday, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signed a new law prohibiting the investment of New Jersey public employee retirement funds in any company that participates in the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement, according to NorthJersey.com.
New Jersey joins several other states in enacting anti-BDS legislation, including South Carolina, Illinois, Colorado, New York, Arizona, Florida, and Indiana.
The BDS movement uses boycotts, divestment, and sanctions as methods to apply economic and political pressure on Israel to end the occupation of Palestinian land, among other goals.
It is modeled after the Anti-Apartheid Movement of the second half of the 20th century, which sought to use boycotts and economic sanctions to pressure South Africa to end its system of apartheid.
According to Harvard Law Review, these laws violate the First Amendment rights of businesses or individuals seeking to do business with state governments.
From the Harvard Law Review:
The argument that these laws are unconstitutional turns on two propositions: (1) participation in political boycotts is protected First Amendment activity, and (2) governments cannot condition a contract for services on the relinquishing of First Amendment rights.
The authors cite a 1982 Supreme Court case in which the NAACP was sued by white merchants arguing that the NAACP was responsible for the financial losses they incurred during a NAACP-led boycott. The Court found that non-violent boycotts were constitutionally protected speech.
A legal doctrine known as “unconstitutional conditions” states that a government cannot deny a benefit to an individual based on the requirement that they surrender a constitutional right.
The Rutgers University — New Brunswick chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine have supported BDS as a method by which to meet the organization’s goals.
