Mark Levin Trashes the Constitution to Protect Violent West Bank Settlers

Mark Levin Trashes the Constitution to Protect Violent West Bank Settlers Mark Levin is at it again. He is livid over a decision by the UK government to ban trade with violent illegal settlers in the West Bank. Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said this week the UK will ban imports of all goods from settlements in the occupied West Bank, in addition to services including financing, construction, infrastructure, real estate, and advertising for settlements. For Levin and the Zionists in Israel and the United States, a boycott of Kahanist settlers is antisemitism, the same as public criticism of Israel over its slaughter of Palestinians, most of whom are women and children, is hatred of Jews. Levin considers himself a constitutional lawyer. However, his interpretation of the US Constitution is highly selective. As an ardent and outspoken Zionist and defender of apartheid and genocide, he believes a boycott of Israel is not protected by the First Amendment. The right to boycott was reaffirmed in 1982 with a Supreme Court ruling on NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. It held that nonviolent political boycotts are a form of protected speech. However, this is irrelevant when it comes to Israel. The case centered around a civil-rights boycott of white-owned businesses in Mississippi. The Court upheld the right to peaceful advocacy, association, and political expression that were integral to the campaign. In 2022, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed Arkansas' anti-boycott contracting legislation. The majority determined that the law governed commercial purchasing choices rather than safeguarding speech. In February 2023, the Supreme Court decided not to review an appeal. However, court rulings in Texas, Arizona, and Arkansas have upheld the right to boycott as as a protected form of political expression under the First Amendment, challenging the legality of anti-BDS laws across the United States. 'Close to 40 states across the U.S. have laws that require ending contracts with and/or divesting from companies that engage in antisemitic boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel,' Levin posted to social media on September 7. These states whose combined GDP is significant should publicly make clear to countries such as the UK that companies that engage in BDS because of their decisions will face consequences under state anti-BDS laws. By the way, Florida and Texas combined have a much larger GDP than the UK. The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) movement is now illegal in 38 states. Congress has also considered anti-boycott legislation. In 2019, the Senate passed S.1, which contains anti-boycott provisions. In 2023, Republicans, including Marco Rubio, reintroduced the Combating BDS Act. Most Americans oppose anti-BDS laws by a wide margin. 72% oppose laws penalizing people who boycott Israel while 22% supported such laws, according to the University of Maryland's Critical Issues Poll. Levin is not opposed to BDS if it focuses on the correct target. In 2021, for instance, he demanded a BDS-style boycott of big tech and major television networks in response to criticism of Israel. 'He argues that the way to fight against distortions and false claims, and to counter the media censors, is take a page from the anti-Israel activists' playbook,' reported the Jerusalem News Syndicate in 2021. Does Levin disagree with the colonial protests against British goods in the 1760s and 1770s that led to the Boston Tea Party? Does he believe the Montgomery bus boycott in the mid-1950s was illegitimate? How about the United Farm Workers boycotts in the 1960s, or the NAACP Mississippi boycott of white-owned businesses, also in the 60s? No, probably not. The only legitimate opposition to BDS concerns Israel. The Zionist state gets a pass and the Constitution is null and void when confronted with spurious accusations of antisemitism.