A bipartisan group of lawmakers is scrambling at the eleventh hour to include controversial language in a year-end spending bill prohibiting U.S. companies from joining boycotts of Israel launched by the United Nations or similar groups.

Sen. Ben Cardin Benjamin (Ben) Louis CardinCongress must finish work on popular conservation bill before time runs out PPP application window closes after coronavirus talks deadlock Congress eyes tighter restrictions on next round of small business help MORE (D-Md.) and other members are pressing congressional leaders to attach his Israel anti-boycott legislation to a sweeping omnibus spending package — a move that could complicate efforts to prevent a government shutdown.

ADVERTISEMENT

“There is bipartisan interest in this issue, but everything is still being negotiated and nothing has been decided,” said one senior House Republican aide.

Supporters of the measure say it would simply expand an existing prohibition on companies participating in anti-Israel boycotts led by foreign governments to those orchestrated by international governmental organizations (IGOs).

“We don’t want our companies to be forced into implementing other countries’ decisions to boycott U.S. allies,” said a Cardin spokesperson.

But the provision has been hammered by human rights and free speech groups, which contend the proposal prioritizes the concerns of a foreign government over constitutionally guaranteed First Amendment protections. Those protections, the critics maintain, include the right to participate in the so-called boycott, divestment, sanctions movement (BDS) — an international campaign designed to press Israel on human rights issues surrounding the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict — regardless who is coordinating those activities.

“This bill sets a precedent for penalizing First Amendment actions because they’re unpopular or because the government doesn’t agree with them,” said Manar Waheed, senior legislative and advocacy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

“This is a step on a road to the erosion of First Amendment rights in a way that will impact movements and viewpoints for the future.”

A decision to attach the language to an enormous, year-end spending bill is sure to stir controversy, particularly on the Democratic side of the aisle, where a number of liberal lawmakers have accused Israel of human rights abuses amid the decades-long Palestinian conflict.

Rep. Betty McCollum Betty Louise McCollumOVERNIGHT ENERGY: Trump extends Florida offshore drilling pause, expands it to Georgia, South Carolina | Democrats probe Park Service involvement in GOP convention | Sanders attacks 'corporate welfare' to coal industry included in relief package Democrats probe Park Service involvement in GOP convention Overnight Energy: EPA chief outlines vision for agency under 'Trump's second term' | Agency sued over decision not to regulate chemical linked to fetal brain damage MORE (D-Minn.) sounded a warning last week that congressional leaders are working serendipitously “to slip language into a must-pass spending bill that criminalizes politically motivated boycotts against Israel.”

“The Israel Anti-Boycott Act violates our right to free speech,” McCollum tweeted.

The office of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi Nancy PelosiHoyer: House should vote on COVID-19 aid — with or without a bipartisan deal Ruth Bader Ginsburg lies in repose at Supreme Court McCarthy threatens motion to oust Pelosi if she moves forward with impeachment MORE (D-Calif.), who’s poised to take the Speaker’s gavel next year, declined to comment on the merits of the legislation.

A senior House Democratic aide suggested the issue will necessarily be punted to next year, if talks over an omnibus break down and Congress is forced to pass a short-term continuing resolution (CR).

“More likely is a CR so this wouldn’t have a place to go,” the aide said.

The office of Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer Chuck SchumerCruz blocks amended resolution honoring Ginsburg over language about her dying wish Senate Democrats introduce legislation to probe politicization of pandemic response Schumer interrupted during live briefing by heckler: 'Stop lying to the people' MORE (D-N.Y.) declined to comment on the record, while a spokesman for Sen. Mitch McConnell Addison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellFEC flags McConnell campaign over suspected accounting errors Poll: 59 percent think president elected in November should name next Supreme Court justice Mark Kelly: Arizona Senate race winner should be sworn in 'promptly' MORE (R-Ky.) said the majority leader has no intention of negotiating the spending bill through the press.

Co-sponsored by Sen. Rob Portman Robert (Rob) Jones PortmanMcConnell locks down key GOP votes in Supreme Court fight Romney undecided on authorizing subpoenas for GOP Obama-era probes Congress needs to prioritize government digital service delivery MORE (R-Ohio), Cardin’s anti-boycott legislation is just one of many provisions lawmakers from both parties are clamoring to attach to the enormous spending bill, which is among the last pieces of legislation to be considered before the year’s end.

The legislation is a response to a resolution adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in 2016, when it sought to establish a database of international companies doing business in disputed territories occupied by Israel, including the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

Supporters of the proposal say it marks a simple expansion of anti-boycott language adopted in 1977 as part of amendments to the Export Administration Act, which sought to protect U.S. companies from being forced to engage in foreign-backed boycotts against their better judgment. At the time, the concern was the Arab League boycott against Israel, which featured black lists designed to pressure international companies to join the cause.

Bill supporters say there’s an urgency to passing the legislation now, since the UNHRC is moving forward with its database.

“It’s that movement from the international governmental organizations — the UNHRC specifically — that is driving some of the increased urgency of trying to get this done sooner rather than later,” said Cardin’s spokesperson. “Because they’re not waiting for Congress. They’re just plowing ahead.”

The critics see another reason behind the push to move the legislation this month. Democrats are set to take control of the House next year, and several incoming freshmen on the Democrats’ side have been vocal supporters of the BDS movement, including Rep.-elects Rashida Tlaib Rashida Harbi TlaibTrump attacks Omar for criticizing US: 'How did you do where you came from?' George Conway: 'Trump is like a practical joke that got out of hand' Pelosi endorses Kennedy in Massachusetts Senate primary challenge MORE (D-Mich.), the daughter of Palestinian immigrants, and Ilhan Omar Ilhan OmarOmar fires back at Trump over rally remarks: 'This is my country' Trump attacks Omar for criticizing US: 'How did you do where you came from?' Democrats scramble on COVID-19 relief amid division, Trump surprise MORE (D-Minn.), the first Somali-American ever elected to Congress.

“There’s very much a reason that members of Congress, leadership in Congress, is trying to push this through a spending bill without a debate before the new Congress comes in, and that’s because they know they’ll have less support for legislation that violates the First Amendment in this way in the new Congress,” said the ACLU’s Waheed.

Backing the critic’s argument, two federal courts have ruled this year against Israel anti-boycott laws passed by state lawmakers in Kansas and Arizona. Both of those suits were brought by the ACLU, which has launched a similar challenge in Arkansas and filed yet another in Texas on Tuesday.

“This is very clearly part of a larger effort to silence speech on this issue,” said Waheed.

The debate arrives as congressional leaders are scrambling to pass a series of seven federal spending bills before midnight Friday to prevent a partial government shutdown. The negotiations have been entangled in President Trump Donald John TrumpBiden on Trump's refusal to commit to peaceful transfer of power: 'What country are we in?' Romney: 'Unthinkable and unacceptable' to not commit to peaceful transition of power Two Louisville police officers shot amid Breonna Taylor grand jury protests MORE’s demand that funding for the Homeland Security Department include $5 billion for new construction of the U.S.-Mexico border wall that was central to his 2016 campaign — a demand that’s a nonstarter with Democratic leaders.

Some supporters of the anti-boycott legislation said they’re in no hurry to rush the legislation through Congress this year.

Rep. Eliot Engel Eliot Lance EngelHouse panel halts contempt proceedings against Pompeo after documents turned over Engel subpoenas US global media chief Michael Pack The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by The Air Line Pilots Association - Pence lauds Harris as 'experienced debater'; Trump, Biden diverge over debate prep MORE (D-N.Y.), who’s in line to chair the House Foreign Affairs Committee in the next Congress, said it will be extremely tough to get anything “of import” into an omnibus bill this month.

“We’re realistic in terms of what can be gotten and what cannot be gotten,” Engel said.

“I’m not so worried about it, because we’re going to take over next year,” he continued. “If we don’t get to it now, we’ll have plenty of time in January and February to hit the ground running.”