Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
This bill amends the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 to extend its provisions to "international governmental organizations" wherever the law now refers to foreign countries. It also requires the President to submit an annual public report listing foreign countries and international organizations that foster or impose boycotts and describing those boycotts.
Progressives emphasize free speech and activist chill risks.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly identifies where the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 should be changed and adds a recurring public report; however, it omits definitions for key terms, fiscal and operational detail, and safeguards for foreseeable edge cases.
This bill amends the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 to extend its provisions to "international governmental organizations" wherever the law now refers to foreign countries.
It also requires the President to submit an annual public report listing foreign countries and international organizations that foster or impose boycotts and describing those boycotts.
Modest, administrative amendment to an existing statute with low fiscal impact improves odds, but subject-matter controversy and Senate hurdles lower overall chance.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly identifies where the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 should be changed and adds a recurring public report; however, it omits definitions for key terms, fiscal and operational detail, and safeguards for foreseeable edge cases.
Progressives emphasize free speech and activist chill risks.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize free speech and activist chill risks.
Likely skeptical or opposed.
The expansion to international governmental organizations could broaden penalties or compliance burdens and may chill political boycotts or advocacy.
Supporters would need strong First Amendment safeguards and narrow definitions to reduce civil liberties concerns.
Cautiously receptive but pragmatic.
Values transparency the report provides, but wants clear statutory language, limited unintended consequences, and minimal diplomatic friction.
Will weigh administrative cost and legal clarity before fully endorsing.
Generally favorable.
Sees the expansion as necessary to prevent international bodies from enacting boycotts against U.S. interests or allies.
Values the reporting requirement as a tool to expose bias and enable U.S. response.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest, administrative amendment to an existing statute with low fiscal impact improves odds, but subject-matter controversy and Senate hurdles lower overall chance.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize free speech and activist chill risks.
Modest, administrative amendment to an existing statute with low fiscal impact improves odds, but subject-matter controversy and Senate hur…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly identifies where the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018 should be changed and adds a recurring public report; however, it…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.