Punishing Israel-boycotters is even worse than boycotting Israel

The debate over boycotts of Israel has long been contentious: advocates of BDS argue they are a form of political pressure, while critics view the movement as discriminatory and harmful. That disagreement reflects deep divisions over policy, morality and the proper tools of political expression. On Sept. 3, the House of Representatives took steps to penalize people who engage in boycotts of Israel. Whatever the precise mechanics of that action, the move shifts the focus from contesting ideas in public debate to using state power to punish a particular form of political conduct. There are two separate problems to weigh. Supporters of the punitive measure say governments may legitimately discourage economic actions they see as harmful or discriminatory. But critics warn that criminalizing or sanctioning political boycotts risks undermining core democratic norms: it can chill dissent, entangle the state in deciding which political tactics are permissible, and set precedents that might be used against other forms of protest. The right response to an unpopular or objectionable movement is usually counter-speech, legal challenge, and civic engagement rather than coercive punishment. If lawmakers find BDS objectionable, they can debate, educate, and pursue non-punitive remedies; resorting to penalties extends the battle from the marketplace of ideas into the coercive power of government, with implications that go beyond any single policy disagreement.