Illinois lawmakers face an uphill battle as they attempt to repeal the state’s 2015 ban on boycotts against Israel, highlighting tensions between foreign policy interests and constitutional freedoms.
At a Glance
- Illinois lawmakers are pushing to repeal a 2015 law that penalizes companies boycotting Israel over its policies toward Palestinians
- The current law prohibits state pension funds from investing in companies that participate in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement
- Illinois was the first of 38 states to enact such legislation, establishing an Investment Policy Board to investigate companies’ investment choices
- Critics argue the law infringes on free speech, while supporters defend it as protection for a key U.S. ally
- The repeal effort has stalled in committee despite initial support from some Democratic lawmakers
First-in-Nation Ban Faces Challenge
In 2015, Illinois became the first state to enact legislation prohibiting state pension funds from investing in companies that boycott Israel. The law established the Illinois Investment Policy Board to investigate companies’ investment choices related to Israel, adding those that participate in boycotts to a prohibited entity list.
Currently, 30 companies appear on this list, making them ineligible for state investment consideration. The law was modeled after post-9/11 measures restricting investments in companies doing business with Iran and Sudan.
Now, progressive members of the Illinois General Assembly are working to dismantle this legislation. State Rep. Abdelnasser Rashid, the first Palestinian American elected to the Illinois legislature, introduced House Bill 2723 to repeal the anti-boycott law.
In the Senate, Mike Porfirio sponsored a companion bill. Both measures have stalled in committee despite initially strong support from approximately one-fifth of the Democratic caucus, including leaders from the Latino, Black, and Progressive caucuses.
“It is a matter of making sure that Illinois is on the right side of history – not participating in the oppression of the Palestinian people – but it is also about making sure the Illinoisans and companies that do business in Illinois are not being forced and bullied and retaliated against because they chose to stand for human rights.”, said Abdelnasser Rashid.
Free Speech Concerns vs. Foreign Policy
The effort to repeal the anti-BDS law centers on constitutional arguments about free speech and freedom of expression. Critics of the current law point out that Israel is the only country for which boycotting is specifically penalized in Illinois, raising questions about selective application of economic pressure. The debate has gained new urgency amid the ongoing conflict in Gaza and increasing protests on college campuses across the United States, where students have faced repercussions for expressing pro-Palestinian views.
The BDS Movement, launched 20 years ago, aims to use non-violent economic and political pressure against Israeli policies toward Palestinians. Inspired by the anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa, it encourages individuals, businesses, and governments to withdraw support from Israel until it meets certain conditions related to Palestinian rights. Repeal supporters argue that the current law forces Illinoisans to financially support positions they may fundamentally oppose.
“Unfortunately, it’s more relevant now than ever, because we’ve seen all of the crackdown on student protesters and people who engage in boycott and people who are just voicing their First Amendment rights.”, said Deanna Othman.
US: Illinois state lawmakers attempt long-shot repeal of BDS banhttps://t.co/ubIjNUEkm8
— Middle East Eye (@MiddleEastEye) May 19, 2025
Political Realities Block Progress
Despite the constitutional arguments, political realities in Illinois make passing the repeal legislation unlikely. Several lawmakers who initially sponsored the bills have withdrawn their support, highlighting the political sensitivity surrounding Israel-related legislation. Dick Simpson, a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Illinois Chicago, suggests many legislators may avoid voting on the bill altogether to prevent backlash from constituents on either side of the issue.
“Even though it had quite an impressive list of sponsors and cosponsors, it’s a controversial piece of legislation that is likely to engender a lot of debate that most legislators don’t want to vote on, because they either have Jewish or Palestinian constituents, or both.”, said Dick Simpson.
Further complicating matters, Governor J.B. Pritzker, who is Jewish and considering a potential presidential run in 2028, would likely veto any repeal that reached his desk. The original sponsor of the 2015 law, Senator Sara Feigenholtz, continues to defend the legislation, arguing it does not curtail free speech but protects a key U.S. ally in the Middle East. These factors create substantial obstacles for the repeal effort, even with shifting American public opinion that shows increasing unfavorable views of Israel and its policies.
