反BDS法 (Chinese Wikipedia)

亞利桑那州議會: 亞利桑那州修訂法令，第35篇《公共財政》，第2章《公共基金的運用》，第9條《抵制與撤資以色列》，第393節《定義》："Boycott" means engaging in a refusal to deal, terminating business activities or performing other actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with entities doing business in Israel or in territories controlled by Israel, if those actions are taken either: (a) Based in part on the fact that the entity does business in Israel or in territories controlled by Israel. (b) In a manner that discriminates on the basis of nationality, national origin or religion and that is not based on a valid business reason. 35-393. Definitions, 亞利桑那州議會, [2021-06-03], （原始内容存档于2021-06-04）

bayern.de

vgh.bayern.de

巴伐利亞行政法院 2020-11-19. Landeshauptstadt München muss Veranstaltungssaalfür BDS-Podiumsdiskussion zur Verfügung stellen (PDF), 巴伐利亞行政法院（英语：Bayerischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof）, 2020-11-19 [2021-06-07], （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2021-06-18）

bds-kampagne.de

BDS運動德國抗議信 2018: The fact is that more than 40 Jewish organizations around the world advocate for BDS and oppose equating criticism of Israeli policies with anti-Semitism. The Auschwitz survivor Esther Bejerano, who was a member of the Auschwitz Orchestra, also supports BDS We protest against your shamefulstatementon the occasion of the GUE / NGL event "Boycott, divestment, and sanctions: achievements and challenges" in the European Parliament on 4 December 2018 (PDF), BDS運動德國, 2018-12-22 [2020-06-07], （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2021-06-07）

bonn.de

波恩市政府 2019-05-14. AMTSBLATT bundesstadt bonn Niederschrift über die Sitzung des Rates der Stadt Bonn (PDF), 波恩市政府, 2019-05-14 [2021-06-07], （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2021-06-07）

books.google.com

濫用法律：以法律作為戰爭武器 2016，第251頁. Kittrie, Orde F. Lawfare: Law as a Weapon of War. Oxford University Press. 2016: 430– [2021-06-03]. ISBN 978-0-19-026357-7. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
濫用法律：以法律作為戰爭武器 2016，第251-2頁. Kittrie, Orde F. Lawfare: Law as a Weapon of War. Oxford University Press. 2016: 430– [2021-06-03]. ISBN 978-0-19-026357-7. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

brookings.edu

布魯金斯學會 2020-01-08. Telhami, Shibley. What do Americans think of the BDS movement, aimed at Israel?. 布魯金斯學會. 2020-01-08 [2020-11-02]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-18）.

bundestag.de

德國聯邦議院 2019-05-17. Bundestag verurteilt Boykottaufrufe gegen Israel, 德國聯邦議院, 2019-05-17 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-12）

cair.com

美國以色列關係評議會 2020-02-10. U.S. District Court, District of Georgia, Abby Martin v. Steve Wrigley and Kyle Marrero (PDF), 美國以色列關係評議會（英语：Council on American–Islamic Relations）, 2020-02-10 [2021-06-03], （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2021-05-25）

casetext.com

Casetext Search + Citator 2019-04-25. Amawi v. Pflugerville Indep. Sch. Dist., 373 F. Supp. 3d 717. Casetext Search + Citator. 2019-04-25 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

chicagolawbulletin.com

芝加哥每日法律公報 2019-05-01: Those defending the constitutionality of the laws, like Kontorovich, maintain the trial court misinterpreted Claiborne to convey First Amendment protections to all activities associated with boycotts. "The actual issue at hand [in Claiborne] involves actual boycott organizing activities, basically calling on people to boycott and promoting a boycott, that is speech," he said. "The state can still get contracts under the state law if they say 'We hate Israel and we think Israel should be boycotted.' … They are entirely entitled to contract with the state because that's speech. … Boycotting Israel by itself does not tell you anything about the motives of the boycott." Mansur, Sarah. Free speech rights and the rise of anti-BDS legislation. 芝加哥每日法律公報（英语：Chicago Daily Law Bulletin）. 2019-05-01 [2020-08-27].
芝加哥每日法律公報 2019-05-01: "I think the court has clearly said in Rumsfeld v. FAIR that the decision of who you do business with or not, even when you have a clear ideological motive, does not become expressive," said Eugene Kontorovich, a professor at George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School and a director at the Kohelet Policy Forum in Jerusalem. Mansur, Sarah. Free speech rights and the rise of anti-BDS legislation. 芝加哥每日法律公報（英语：Chicago Daily Law Bulletin）. 2019-05-01 [2020-08-27].
芝加哥每日法律公報 2019-05-01: Hauss, one of those attorneys, argued FAIR shouldn't control because that case didn't concern a consumer boycott movement and neither the word 'boycott' nor any citation to Claiborne appears anywhere in the FAIR ruling. "The notion that FAIR could overrule Claiborne, without even mentioning it, doesn't really pass the laugh test," Hauss said. "I think everyone understands when someone is participating in a BDS boycott that they are expressing something." Mansur, Sarah. Free speech rights and the rise of anti-BDS legislation. 芝加哥每日法律公報（英语：Chicago Daily Law Bulletin）. 2019-05-01 [2020-08-27].
芝加哥每日法律公報 2019-05-01: Attorney Marc Greendorfer founded the Zachor Legal Institute, a think tank focused on legal challenges to the BDS movement. He said the Longshoremen case shows that the government can limit boycotts that serve as political protest of foreign nations' conduct. "It happens to be the case that International Longshoremen's involved unions, but it also involved directly analogous fact patterns," Greendorfer said. Mansur, Sarah. Free speech rights and the rise of anti-BDS legislation. 芝加哥每日法律公報（英语：Chicago Daily Law Bulletin）. 2019-05-01 [2020-08-27].

columbia.edu

globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu

全球言論自由：約達爾. Mikkel Jordahl v. Mark Brnovich. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2020-08-24]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
全球言論自由：孔茨. Koontz v. Watson. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2020-08-19]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
全球言論自由：沃爾德里. Arkansas Times LP v. Mark Waldrip. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2020-08-18]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
全球言論自由：阿瑪維. Amawi v. Pflugerville Independent School District. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-04）.
全球言論自由：巴爾達西. Baldassi & Others v. France. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2020-08-14]. （原始内容存档于2021-03-03）.
全球言論自由：奧爾登堡. Glanz v. Oldenburg. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2021-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-06）.
全球言論自由：慕尼黑. Ried v. Munich. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2021-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-06）.
全球言論自由：波恩. German-Palestinian Women's Association v. Bonn. 哥倫比亞大學全球言論自由. [2021-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-06）.

commondreams.org

共同夢想 2019-01-29. Johnson, Jake, 25 Democrats Join GOP to Advance Anti-Boycott Bill Bernie Sanders Warns Violates "Americans' First Amendment Rights", 共同夢想（英语：Common Dreams）, 2019-01-29 [2021-06-04], （原始内容存档于2021-06-04）

congress.gov

美國眾議院法案4009. H.R.4009 - 113th Congress (2013-2014): Protect Academic Freedom Act. Congress.gov. 2014-02-06 [2020-08-19]. （原始内容存档于2021-12-18）.
美國聯邦國會116眾議院動議246. H.Res.246 - Opposing efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel and the Global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement targeting Israel., 美國國會, 2020-07-23 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2019-07-24）
美國聯邦國會116眾議院動議496. H.Res.496 - Affirming that all Americans have the right to participate in boycotts in pursuit of civil and human rights at home and abroad, as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution., 美國國會, 20 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）请检查|date=中的日期值 (帮助)

congressionalmonitor.org

國會監察者 2017-10-30. Boycott our Enemies Not Israel Act. congressionalmonitor.org. 2017-10-30 [2020-08-19]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

doi.org

哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: Though the specific provisions of anti-BDS laws vary widely, they have taken two primary forms: (1) contract-focused laws that condition the receipt of government contracts on an entity certifying that it is not boycotting and will not boycott Israel; and (2) investment-focused laws that mandate public investment funds to divest from entities involved in boycotts of Israel. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
巴勒斯坦研究期刊 2020-02-01，第76頁. White, Ben. Delegitimizing Solidarity: Israel Smears Palestine Advocacy as Anti-Semitic. 巴勒斯坦研究期刊（英语：Journal of Palestine Studies）. 2020-02-01, 49 (2): 65–79 [2020-08-15]. ISSN 0377-919X. doi:10.1525/jps.2020.49.2.65 . （原始内容存档于2020-08-12）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: While an observer could mistake the actions of a BDS boycotter as motivated by something other than specific beliefs about Israel's treatment of Palestinians—for example, anti-semitism — the expressive quality of BDS boycotts is more palpable than the pragmatic recruitment events in Rumsfeld. Particularly as boycotts of Israel have become more widespread and publicized, it is increasingly reasonable to infer a boycotter's political motivations from merely observing their conduct. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: Furthermore, Kontorovich's argument appears to conflict with the basic factual circumstances of Claiborne, in which the NAACP and other groups specifically and deliberately targeted white-owned businesses. That is, the boycotters discriminated on the basis of race, which, according to the argument of Cuomo, Kontorovich, and others, would justify the government banning the boycott altogether. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05，第130頁: This provision extends far beyond the standard dictionary definition of "boycott," which would merely encompass a refusal to deal, though the precise limits of the statutory prohibition are not clear. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05，第131頁: However, divestment could fall within the broad definitions of "boycott" of many of the statutes, even if the definitions do not explicitly cover such conduct. ... In the four state laws that explicitly mention "sanctions," the specific language regarding sanctions is not written in a way that would be enforceable against a business. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
Bot 2019. Bot, Michiel. The right to boycott: BDS, law, and politics in a global context. Transnational Legal Theory. 2019, 10 (3–4): 421–445 [2021-06-03]. S2CID 203154725. doi:10.1080/20414005.2019.1672134 . （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

dw.com

德國之聲 2019-05-17. Knight, Ben, German parliament condemns 'anti-Semitic' BDS movement, 德國之聲, 2019-05-17 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-18）

eccpalestine.org

歐洲巴勒斯坦協力委員協會 2019-09-19. Another German Court rules in favour of supporters of BDS Movement. European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine. 2019-09-19 [2021-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-06）.

electronicintifada.net

電子起義 2013-11-21. Abunimah, Ali. Boycott activists beat Israel lobby in French high court. 電子起義（英语：The Electronic Intifada）. 2013-11-21 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.

everycrsreport.com

國會研究處 2019-12-03，第21頁. Zanotti, Jim; Weiss, Martin A.; Brannon, Valerie C.; Elsea, Jennifer K. Israel and the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement (PDF). 國會研究處. 2019-12-03 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2020-10-19）.

flsenate.gov

佛羅里達州參議院動議894. CS for SR 894, 佛羅里達州參議院, [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-02-25）

forward.com

前進 2020-08-31. Pink, Aiden. U.S. pro-Israel groups failed to disclose grants from Israeli government. 前進（英语：The Forward）. 2020-08-31 [2020-09-10]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-18）.

govtrack.us

追踪美國政府 2020-04-18. Boycott Our Enemies not Israel Act (2015 - H.R. 1572). GovTrack.us. 2020-04-18 [2020-08-19]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

haaretz.com

國土報 2015-03-27. U.S. lawmakers introduce legislation to prevent Israel boycotts, 國土報, 2015-03-27 [2021-06-03], （原始内容存档于2015-09-24）
國土報 2015-02-15. BDS a Hate Crime? In France, Legal Vigilance Punishes anti-Israel Activists, 國土報, 2015-02-15 [2021-06-03], （原始内容存档于2017-09-21）
國土報 2019-11-24. U.K.'s Conservative Party vows to ban councils from boycotting Israeli products - Europe. 國土報. 2019-11-24 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-11）.

harvardlawreview.org

哈佛法律評論 2020: Such logic might have required the antiapartheid movement to address not just injustice by white South Africans, but also abuses by the black African National Congress leadership or by other African countries. ... Iran, ..., self-defines based on religion, yet current U.S. refusals to buy from Iran do not give rise to anti-Shia religious discrimination claims Wielding Antidiscrimination Law to Suppress the Movement for Palestinian Rights. 哈佛法律評論. 2020-02-10 [2020-08-28]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
哈佛法律評論 2020: As nine states argued in an amicus brief: it is "intuitively obvious . . . [that] targeting a particular group (and those associating with them) for the intentional infliction of economic harm is discrimination, by definition," and BDS does just that. Wielding Antidiscrimination Law to Suppress the Movement for Palestinian Rights. 哈佛法律評論. 2020-02-10 [2020-08-28]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
哈佛法律評論 2020: Because there is no specific test for whether a consumer boycott constitutes discrimination, courts can instead look to two types of discrimination widely recognized in existing law: discriminatory intent and disparate impact discrimination. Wielding Antidiscrimination Law to Suppress the Movement for Palestinian Rights. 哈佛法律評論. 2020-02-10 [2020-08-28]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
哈佛法律評論 2016: And because political boycotts are directed at issues of public concern, they are protected activities that "rest[] on the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values." S.C. Code Ann. 11-35-5300 (2015). 哈佛法律評論. 2016-05-10 [2020-11-01]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.
哈佛法律評論 2016: Kontorovich has advanced this conduct-based argument, analogizing the anti-BDS statute to President Obama's executive order forbidding federal contractors from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation.... But this definition would cover the Claiborne Hardware boycott, which was directed at white merchants. Participation in a political boycott, even if it has a racial dimension, cannot be equated with a simple act of discrimination. S.C. Code Ann. 11-35-5300 (2015). 哈佛法律評論. 2016-05-10 [2020-11-01]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.
哈佛法律評論 2016: ... under the doctrine of "unconstitutional conditions," which holds that the government "may not deny a benefit to a person on a basis that infringes his constitutionally protected interests — especially, his interest in freedom of speech," this distinction between direct and indirect burdens on protected speech makes no constitutional difference. In fact, the Supreme Court has applied the doctrine to directly hold that the state cannot terminate contracts in retaliation for a contractor's exercise of First Amendment rights. S.C. Code Ann. 11-35-5300 (2015). 哈佛法律評論. 2016-05-10 [2020-11-01]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.
哈佛法律評論 2016: As noted above, in the case of the anti-BDS statute, it is difficult to argue that a company's decision to boycott a particular nation is related to its ability to perform a contract for which it bids. Instead, the state is using its economic leverage to discourage protected boycott activity. With the unconstitutional conditions doctrine "undergoing something of a renaissance in the Roberts Court," the Court could well use AID's formulation of the doctrine to invalidate the anti-BDS statute even if it stopped short of extending First Amendment protection to all new bidders. S.C. Code Ann. 11-35-5300 (2015). 哈佛法律評論. 2016-05-10 [2020-11-01]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.
哈佛法律評論 2016: Claiborne Hardware had not yet been decided in 1979, so it was not yet clear that participation in a political boycott was protected First Amendment activity. Today, the federal antiboycott statutes may be unconstitutional. S.C. Code Ann. 11-35-5300 (2015). 哈佛法律評論. 2016-05-10 [2020-11-01]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.
哈佛法律評論 2016: A key feature of both federal statutes is that they apply only to boycotts organized by foreign nations against allies of the United States. S.C. Code Ann. 11-35-5300 (2015). 哈佛法律評論. 2016-05-10 [2020-11-01]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.

i24news.tv

i24news 2018-01-07. Israel publishes 'BDS blacklist' of 20 groups barred from entering country. i24news. 2018-01-07 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2018-11-21）.

ifs.org

言論自由學院 2019-04-16. Amicus Brief: Arkansas Anti-BDS Law Violates the First Amendment. 言論自由學院（英语：Institute For Free Speech）. 2019-04-16 [2020-08-18]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）.

ijvcanada.org

獨立猶太之聲 2019-07-26. Vancouver City Council rejects misguided definition of antisemitism. 獨立猶太之聲（英语：Independent Jewish Voices (Canada)）. 2019-07-26 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.

in.gov

iga.in.gov

印第安納州參議院動議74. Senate Resolution 74, 印第安納州議會, [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2020-10-29）

independent.co.uk

獨立報 2016-02-17. Stone, Jon. Banning boycotts of Israel will protect Britain's national security, Government says. 獨立報. 2016-02-17 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
獨立報 2019-12-16. Osborne, Samuel. Boris Johnson to pass law banning anti-Israel boycott, official says. 獨立報. 2019-12-16 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-04）.

jewishcurrents.org

猶太當今 2019-11-22. Saltzberg, Emma. Poll: Democrats Are Divided on BDS. 猶太當今（英语：Jewish Currents）. 2019-11-22 [2020-11-02]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.

jewishvirtuallibrary.org

猶太虛擬圖書館: To date, 35 states have adopted laws, executive orders or resolutions that are designed to discourage boycotts against Israel. State Anti-BDS Legislation. 猶太虛擬圖書館（英语：Jewish Virtual Library）. [2021-05-01]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-24）.

jpost.com

耶路撒冷郵報 2015-02-10. Wilner, Michael, New bill in Congress prioritizes fight against BDS in EU trade talks, 耶路撒冷郵報, 2015-02-10 [2021-06-03], （原始内容存档于2021-06-04）
耶路撒冷郵報 2020-08-13. Harkov, Lahav. Government reevaluating ban on BDS activists entering Israel. 耶路撒冷郵報. 2020-08-13 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.
耶路撒冷郵報 2016-04-27. Weinthal, Benjamin, Exclusive: French government indicates giant bank violates anti-BDS law, 耶路撒冷郵報, 2016-04-27 [2021-06-03], （原始内容存档于2021-06-07）
耶路撒冷郵報 2017-12-14. Winthal, Benjamin. Munich first in Germany to pass anti-BDS law. 耶路撒冷郵報. 2017-12-14 [2021-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-06）.
耶路撒冷郵報 2018-10-24. Winthal, Benjamin. German court upholds Munich's ban of antisemitic BDS campaign. 耶路撒冷郵報. 2018-10-24 [2021-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）.

jta.org

猶太電訊媒介 2015-02-10. Proposed congressional bill links BDS prevention, EU trade deal, 猶太電訊媒介（英语：Jewish Telegraphic Agency）, 2015-02-10 [2021-06-08], （原始内容存档于2018-07-15）
猶太電訊媒介 2015-10-23. Dolsten, Josefin. French high court confirms BDS activists' discrimination convictions. 猶太電訊媒介（英语：Jewish Telegraphic Agency）. 2015-10-23 [2020-08-14]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-04）.
猶太電訊媒介 2020-06-22. Liphshiz, Cnaan. In first, Spanish state calls attempts to boycott Israel a form of anti-Semitism. 猶太電訊媒介（英语：Jewish Telegraphic Agency）. 2020-06-22 [2020-11-09]. （原始内容存档于2021-03-04）.

justia.com

law.justia.com

公正網 2021-02-12. Arkansas Times LP v. Waldrip, No. 19-1378 (8th Cir. 2021), 公正網, 2021-02-12 [2021-06-03], （原始内容存档于2021-06-04）

lawfareblog.com

Lawfare部落格 2019: In the Arkansas case, Arkansas Times v. Waldrip, the district court ruled that boycotts against Israel, as defined by the statute, are not protected by the First Amendment. Relying on FAIR, the court found that boycotts are not protected "inherently expressive conduct" because "a refusal to deal, or particular commercial purchasing decisions, do not communicate ideas through words or other expressive media." The court similarly concluded that Claiborne was not on point as it "did not 'address purchasing decisions or other non-expressive conduct'" and instead reached only "meetings, speeches, and non-violent picketing." Sobel, Nathaniel. Breaking Down the Combating BDS Act of 2019 and First Amendment Challenges to State Anti-BDS Laws. Lawfare. 2019-03-19 [2020-08-13]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

legiscan.com

南卡羅來納州眾議院4635. South Carolina House Resolution 4635, LegiScan, 2014-02-18 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）

legistar.com

phila.legistar.com

費城市議會動議140029. Condemning the American Studies Association's academic boycott against Israeli academic institutions and urging the Department of Education, the State System of Higher Education and all colleges and universities in Pennsylvania to reject the academic boycott., 費城市議會, 2014-01-30 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）

middleeasteye.net

中東眼 2020-04-29. Palestine activists win landmark Supreme Court ruling against UK government. 中東眼. 2020-04-29 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

middleeastmonitor.com

中東監察者 2020. US legislator: Israel 'asked me' to introduce bill against groups boycotting it. 中東監察者（英语：Middle East Monitor）. 2020-11-18 [2020-12-02]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

mondoweiss.net

Mondoweiss 2019-07-26. Horowitz, Adam. In victory for activists, Vancouver city council votes against adopting IHRA antisemitism definition. Mondoweiss（英语：Mondoweiss）. 2019-07-26 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-05-15）.

ngo-monitor.org

非政府組織監察者 2019-05-22. Germany Declares: BDS is Antisemitic, 非政府組織監察者（英语：NGO Monitor）, 2019-05-22 [2021-06-08], （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）

nytimes.com

紐約時報 2019-08-15: Thursday's decision was the first time the law was used against American lawmakers, though seven French politicians and European Union parliamentarians were denied entry in late 2017, according to The Jerusalem Post. Chokshi, Niraj. The Anti-Boycott Law Israel Used to Bar Both Omar and Tlaib. 紐約時報. 2019-08-15 [2020-11-09]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-08）.
紐約時報 2019-05-07. Bennhold, Katrin. German Parliament Deems B.D.S. Movement Anti-Semitic. 紐約時報. 2019-05-17 [2019-05-23]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-19）.

ohio.gov

legislature.ohio.gov

俄亥俄州眾議院動議10. To condemn the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement and increasing incidents of anti-Semitism., 俄亥俄州議會, [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2020-10-17）

ola.org

安大略省省議會 2016-12-01. Votes and Proceedings 2016-Dec-01, 安大略省省議會, 2016-12-01 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）

openstates.org

亞拉巴馬州參議院動議6. Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement against Israel, denounced, Open States, 2016-02-09 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2017-11-19）

opiniojuris.org

de Leo 2020. de Leo, Andreina. Baldassi and Others v. France: Criminal Convictions of BDS Activists Violate Freedom of Expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. Opinio Juris. 2020-06-16 [2020-11-05]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-14）.
de Leo 2020: ... incitement to discrimination under section 24 (8) of the Law of 29 July 1881. de Leo, Andreina. Baldassi and Others v. France: Criminal Convictions of BDS Activists Violate Freedom of Expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. Opinio Juris. 2020-06-16 [2020-11-05]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-14）.
de Leo 2020: By stressing that everyone has the right to call for a boycott of Israeli products, as long as it does not turn to incitement to intolerance, violence or hate, the Court firmly and categorically rejected the idea that the BDS movement is discriminatory and anti-Semitic in itself. de Leo, Andreina. Baldassi and Others v. France: Criminal Convictions of BDS Activists Violate Freedom of Expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. Opinio Juris. 2020-06-16 [2020-11-05]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-14）.

ourcommons.ca

加拿大國會 2016-02-22. Vote No. 14 42nd Parliament, 1st Session, 加拿大國會, 2016-02-22 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）

palestinelegal.org

合法支持巴勒斯坦 2020: 紐約時報 editorial board criticized the Israel Anti-Boycott Act as "clearly part of a widening attempt to silence one side of the debate." The Los Angeles Times editorial board was unequivocal that boycott and divestment campaigns are protected by the First Amendment. Ten things to know about anti-boycott legislation. 合法支持巴勒斯坦. 2020-01-17 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-23）.
合法支持巴勒斯坦：堪薩斯. Kansas. 合法支持巴勒斯坦. 2019-04-16 [2020-08-19]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-18）.

parlament.gv.at

奧地利國民議會 2020-02-27. Verurteilung von Antisemitismus und der BDS-Bewegung (12/E), 奧地利國民議會, 2020-02-27 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）

parlamentib.es

web.parlamentib.es

巴利阿里群島議會 2020-05-22. BUTLLETÍ OFICIAL del PARLAMENT de les ILLES BALEARS (PDF), 巴利阿里群島議會, 2020-05-22 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2020-10-31）

prnewswire.com

美通社 2021-05-24. BREAKING NEWS: CAIR & PCJF Win 'Major Victory' in Federal Lawsuit Against Georgia's Anti-Israel Boycott Law; Court Rules Anti-BDS Law Violates the First Amendment. 美通社. 2021-05-24 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-05-25）.

publicintegrity.org

公共誠信中心 2019-05-01. Essley White, Liz. How a bill that seeks to shut down boycotts of Israel is spreading state-to-state. 公共誠信中心. 2019-05-01 [2021-06-09]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

rabble.ca

rabble.ca 2016-05-19. Ontario's move against the BDS movement is an attack on free speech. rabble.ca（英语：rabble.ca）. 2016-05-19 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

rcfp.org

新聞自由記者委員會 2019-07-02. This article could be illegal in Arkansas. 新聞自由記者委員會（英语：Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press）. 2019-07-02 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

ris-muenchen.de

慕尼黑事議會 2017-12-13. Gegen jeden Antisemitismus! - Keine Zusammenarbeit mit der antisemitischen BDS-Bewegung (PDF), 慕尼黑事議會, 2017-12-13 [2021-06-07], （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2021-01-15）

rutgerslawreview.com

羅格斯法律評論 2020，第1323頁: However, the Court's analysis made it clear that International Longshoremen was a case about laborlaw under the NLRA, rather than a case about individual rights or the boycott of foreign entities. ... Labor union boycotts have consistently "been analyzed differently than boycotts of business or civil rights groups" Boycotting a Boycott: A First Amendment Analysis of Nationwide Anti-Boycott Legislation (PDF). 羅格斯法律評論（英语：Rutgers Law Review） (羅格斯大學). 2020-05-15, 70 (5): 1304 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2021-06-03）.

sdlegislature.gov

南達科他州眾議院動議1005. Petitioning Congress and the President to defend Israel against hostile actions; expressing the strongest support for, and unity with, the people and State of Israel; and strongly condemning the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement and the increasing incidents of anti-Semitism against Israel and the Jewish people., 南達科他州眾議院, 2019-02-13 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-07-21）

semanticscholar.org

api.semanticscholar.org

Bot 2019. Bot, Michiel. The right to boycott: BDS, law, and politics in a global context. Transnational Legal Theory. 2019, 10 (3–4): 421–445 [2021-06-03]. S2CID 203154725. doi:10.1080/20414005.2019.1672134 . （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

squarespace.com

static1.squarespace.com

巴勒斯坦團結法律支援 2015: That act of Congress in 1979 was a rider to legislation regulating US exports and it was intended to counter participation in the Arab League's boycott of Israel. Specifically, the anti-boycott law prohibited participation in a boycott in cooperation with a foreign country. In no way did that legislation apply to boycotts undertaken as a matter of social, political or moral conscience; nor could it, under core First Amendment principles that protect boycotts undertaken to protest foreign or domestic governmental policies or actions. Boycott and Divestment, Frequently Asked Legal Questions (PDF). Palestine Solidarity Legal Support. 2015-03 [2021-06-08]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2019-10-23）.

ssrn.com

papers.ssrn.com

哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: Though the specific provisions of anti-BDS laws vary widely, they have taken two primary forms: (1) contract-focused laws that condition the receipt of government contracts on an entity certifying that it is not boycotting and will not boycott Israel; and (2) investment-focused laws that mandate public investment funds to divest from entities involved in boycotts of Israel. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: While an observer could mistake the actions of a BDS boycotter as motivated by something other than specific beliefs about Israel's treatment of Palestinians—for example, anti-semitism — the expressive quality of BDS boycotts is more palpable than the pragmatic recruitment events in Rumsfeld. Particularly as boycotts of Israel have become more widespread and publicized, it is increasingly reasonable to infer a boycotter's political motivations from merely observing their conduct. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: Furthermore, Kontorovich's argument appears to conflict with the basic factual circumstances of Claiborne, in which the NAACP and other groups specifically and deliberately targeted white-owned businesses. That is, the boycotters discriminated on the basis of race, which, according to the argument of Cuomo, Kontorovich, and others, would justify the government banning the boycott altogether. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05，第130頁: This provision extends far beyond the standard dictionary definition of "boycott," which would merely encompass a refusal to deal, though the precise limits of the statutory prohibition are not clear. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05，第131頁: However, divestment could fall within the broad definitions of "boycott" of many of the statutes, even if the definitions do not explicitly cover such conduct. ... In the four state laws that explicitly mention "sanctions," the specific language regarding sanctions is not written in a way that would be enforceable against a business. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.

ssrn.com

哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: Though the specific provisions of anti-BDS laws vary widely, they have taken two primary forms: (1) contract-focused laws that condition the receipt of government contracts on an entity certifying that it is not boycotting and will not boycott Israel; and (2) investment-focused laws that mandate public investment funds to divest from entities involved in boycotts of Israel. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: While an observer could mistake the actions of a BDS boycotter as motivated by something other than specific beliefs about Israel's treatment of Palestinians—for example, anti-semitism — the expressive quality of BDS boycotts is more palpable than the pragmatic recruitment events in Rumsfeld. Particularly as boycotts of Israel have become more widespread and publicized, it is increasingly reasonable to infer a boycotter's political motivations from merely observing their conduct. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05: Furthermore, Kontorovich's argument appears to conflict with the basic factual circumstances of Claiborne, in which the NAACP and other groups specifically and deliberately targeted white-owned businesses. That is, the boycotters discriminated on the basis of race, which, according to the argument of Cuomo, Kontorovich, and others, would justify the government banning the boycott altogether. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05，第130頁: This provision extends far beyond the standard dictionary definition of "boycott," which would merely encompass a refusal to deal, though the precise limits of the statutory prohibition are not clear. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.
哥倫比亞國際法雜誌 2018-05，第131頁: However, divestment could fall within the broad definitions of "boycott" of many of the statutes, even if the definitions do not explicitly cover such conduct. ... In the four state laws that explicitly mention "sanctions," the specific language regarding sanctions is not written in a way that would be enforceable against a business. Cuffman, Timothy. The State Power to Boycott a Boycott: The Thorny Constitutionality of State Anti-BDS Laws. 哥倫比亞國際法雜誌（英语：Columbia Journal of Transnational Law）. 2018-05-29 [2020-08-14]. SSRN 3186369 . doi:10.2139/ssrn.3186369. （原始内容存档于2021-09-25）.

state.pa.us

legis.state.pa.us

賓夕法尼亞州眾議院動議370. A Resolution condemning the international Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement and its activities in this Commonwealth for seeking to undermine the Jewish people's right to self-determination, which they are fulfilling in the State of Israel., 賓夕法尼亞州議會, 2015-06-23 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）
賓夕法尼亞州參議院動議136. A Resolution condemning economic, social, cultural and other boycotts of Israel and growing incidents of anti-Semitism., 賓夕法尼亞州議會, 2015-09-21 [2021-06-09], （原始内容存档于2021-06-09）

sueddeutsche.de

南德意志報 2020-11-19. Wetzel, Jakob, Stadt darf Diskussionen über die BDS-Kampagne nicht verhindern, 南德意志報, 2020-11-19 [2021-06-07], （原始内容存档于2021-05-27）

tandfonline.com

Bot 2019. Bot, Michiel. The right to boycott: BDS, law, and politics in a global context. Transnational Legal Theory. 2019, 10 (3–4): 421–445 [2021-06-03]. S2CID 203154725. doi:10.1080/20414005.2019.1672134 . （原始内容存档于2021-06-03）.

theguardian.com

衛報 2018-01-07. Beaumont, Peter. Israel imposes travel ban on 20 foreign NGOs over boycott movement. 衛報. 2018-01-07 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-05-15）.

theintercept.com

The Intercept 2019-04-26: By any name, that's free speech and free speech is the north star of our democracy. It's foundational, and this decision underlines that no issue of importance can be addressed if the speech about it is stymied, or worse, silenced. Greenwald, Glenn. In Case Brought by School Speech Pathologist, Texas Federal Court Becomes the Third to Strike Down Pro-Israel Oath as Unconstitutional. The Intercept. 2019-04-26 [2021-06-03]. （原始内容存档于2021-06-10）.