Add New York’s once-moderate Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand to the ever-growing list of Democrats who live in mortal fear of alienating the party’s hard-left base.

Or to the ranks of senators who apparently don’t even read the bills they co-sponsor.

At a town-hall meeting in Queens last weekend, Gillibrand mollified angry protesters by vowing to withdraw her support for the Israel Anti-Boycott Act unless it’s changed to reflect the (spurious) free-speech concerns of the American Civil Liberties Union.

She also reportedly threw in some gratuitous criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: “I do share your concerns about the current government of Israel.”

The ACLU claims the bipartisan bill, which has 43 co-sponsors (including Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer) would penalize individuals who advocate boycotting Israel.

Yet it does no such thing. It merely updates the 1977 Export Administration Act (which barred cooperation with the Arab League boycott of Israel) to include other such boycotts, including ones by UN agencies, particularly the noxious Human Rights Council.

The HRC is preparing an unprecedented list of companies to be boycotted for such “crimes” as “supporting settlements.”

But as law professor Eugene Kontorovich recently noted in The Washington Post, four decades worth of regulations and enforcement of anti-boycott law make clear that merely advocating a boycott isn’t illegal. Only commercial conduct counts.

So, as Kontorovich explained, a KKK member is free to advocate racism — but not if he refuses to sell his house to a Jew or an African-American.

But Gillibrand either didn’t know the basic facts about legislation she co-sponsored, or didn’t dare call critics on their fake “facts.”

Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin, the bill’s chief Democratic sponsor, says the ACLU has completely misinterpreted the bill, but he’s willing to clear up any ambiguities.

We doubt that will satisfy the ACLU or the Israel-hating left. Which will leave Gillibrand stuck with her finger to the wind.