US states and cities that engage in boycotts against Israeli companies will be ineligible for federal funding aimed at disaster preparedness, as announced by the Trump administration. This new requirement ties federal aid directly to political positions regarding Israel, marking a significant shift in how federal funds may be allocated.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) outlined the new stipulations in grant notices released on October 6, 2023. States must certify that they will not sever “commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies” to qualify for a share of approximately $1.9 billion allocated for emergency management. This funding is crucial for expenses such as search-and-rescue equipment, emergency manager salaries, and backup power systems.
Political Implications of the Funding Restrictions
This requirement represents the Trump administration’s latest initiative to leverage federal funding as a means of promoting its stance on Israel. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees FEMA, previously stated in April that states and cities receiving its grants must refrain from boycotting Israel. Additionally, FEMA indicated that states would also need to allocate part of their federal terrorism prevention funds to assist in the arrest of migrants, aligning with the administration’s priorities.
The push against boycotts is particularly aimed at the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which aims to economically pressure Israel to end its occupation of Palestinian territories. Supporters of BDS have become increasingly vocal, especially following the escalation of violence in 2023, when Hamas attacked southern Israel and Israel responded with military actions in Gaza.
A spokesperson for DHS, Secretary Kristi Noem, emphasized the agency’s commitment to enforcing anti-discrimination laws, stating, “DHS will enforce all antidiscrimination laws and policies, including as it relates to the BDS movement, which is expressly grounded in antisemitism.”
Reactions to the New Policy
The mandate has drawn mixed reactions. Critics, including Mahmoud Nawajaa of the BDS Movement, described the requirement as “shameful,” asserting that it undermines free expression and peaceful protest. Conversely, the American Jewish Committee (AJC), an advocacy organization that supports Israel, voiced its approval of the policy. Holly Huffnagle, the AJC’s director of antisemitism policy, supported the administration’s stance, highlighting it as a necessary measure against perceived discrimination.
FEMA’s recent grant guidance specifies that major cities must agree to the new Israel policy to receive a portion of $553.5 million earmarked for terrorism prevention in urban areas. For example, New York is projected to receive $92.2 million, the largest allocation among recipients, based on an assessment of the “relative risk of terrorism.”
This new federal requirement adds to a growing trend, as at least 34 states have already enacted anti-BDS laws or policies, according to research from a University of Pennsylvania law journal. The implications of this funding restriction may extend beyond fiscal impact, influencing the broader political discourse surrounding Israel and its relationship with the United States.
