@enhydra lutris

so what if it is illegal as proven in a court of law
that does not stop the people from becoming aware
of the issue and reacting. the fed can slap down the state
which slaps down the county or local municipality

so just do it

#1

here's the government summary of existing law

Shown Here:
Introduced in Senate (03/23/2017)
Israel Anti-Boycott Act

This bill declares that Congress: (1) opposes the United Nations Human Rights Council resolution of March 24, 2016, which urges countries to pressure companies to divest from, or break contracts with, Israel; and (2) encourages full implementation of the United States-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of 2014 through enhanced, governmentwide, coordinated U.S.-Israel scientific and technological cooperation in civilian areas.

The bill amends the Export Administration Act of 1979 to declare that it shall be U.S. policy to oppose:

requests by foreign countries to impose restrictive practices or boycotts against other countries friendly to the United States or against U.S. persons; and
restrictive trade practices or boycotts fostered or imposed by an international governmental organization, or requests to impose such practices or boycotts, against Israel.
The bill prohibits any U.S. person engaged interstate or foreign commerce from supporting:

any request by a foreign country to impose any boycott against a country that is friendly to the United States and that is not itself the object of any form of boycott pursuant to United States law or regulation, or
any boycott fostered or imposed by any international governmental organization against Israel or any request by any international governmental organization to impose such a boycott.
The bill amends the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 to include as a reason for the Export-Import Bank to deny credit applications for the export of goods and services between the United States and foreign countries, opposition to policies and actions that are politically motivated and are intended to penalize or otherwise limit commercial relations specifically with citizens or residents of Israel, entities organized under the laws of Israel, or the government of Israel.

Not sure what "support means", but I believe it is intended to prohibit compliance with such boycotts. There is or was existing tax law under which companies complying with boycott requests would lose certain tax credits and other tax benefits. Commerc also penalized such behavior, but I don't know exactly how.

It seems fundamental that one has the right to buy from whomever one sees fit and, likewise, to sell to whomever one sees fit so long as one does not discriminate against any US persons in an illegally discriminatory manner. However, I'm not sure there is a constitutional provision guaranteeing such a right. One has to look to the language of the 9th and 10th amendments.

Sadly, Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution grants Congress the power:

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

, as well as the power:

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

.

Many years ago the city of Berkeley, CA instituted a Boycott against South Africa. It was slapped down by at least one federal court on the grounds that the Constitution granted the powers to engage in foreign affairs strictly to the feds. I forget the details or the wording, but, iirc, concluded that citizens were still free to engage in boycotts, just not any level of state or local government. However, I was looking at what a specific case prohibited, and not at whether any such citizen's right was guaranteed.

be well and have a good one