One interesting part of this, according to the summary, is...
Prohibited actions include...furnishing information about whether someone is associated with charitable or fraternal organizations that support the boycotted country.
Does this mean, for example, that this blocks and penalizes some people from pointing out if someone took money from AIPAC?
Current law prohibits various actions by U.S. persons (individuals or entities) in relation to boycotts imposed by foreign governments on a country which is friendly to the United States and that is not itself the object of a U.S. boycott. This bill applies those prohibitions to similar boycotts imposed by IGOs.
It's not penalizing the IGOs. It has no authority over IGOs. This is about prohibiting (some) Americans from boycotting, the IGOs is just another method to determine prohibited boycotts.
AIPAC isn't an IGO, but it is an "organization that supports the boycotted country."
As far as I can tell, IGOs themselves aren't impacted or targeted in any way, anyway.
I'm no lawyer but the fact that AIPAC was found and funded domestically means you can BDS them all you want without this law affecting you. Unless I'm wrong.
No, you're missing the point. The IGO Boycott amendment adds in as a prohibited action, right there along with boycotting, that you can't draw attention to that someone is connected to an organization on the side that supports the country. Apparently under discrimination reasoning.
So it's not that you can't boycott AIPAC (they're not a country and, yes, they're technically domestic.) It's that, potentially, you could be violating the bill if you discriminate against someone by pointing out that they have a relationship with AIPAC.
One interesting part of this, according to the summary, is...
Does this mean, for example, that this blocks and penalizes some people from pointing out if someone took money from AIPAC?
I wouldn't think so, AIPAC isn't an IGO.
The paragraph right about though:
It's not penalizing the IGOs. It has no authority over IGOs. This is about prohibiting (some) Americans from boycotting, the IGOs is just another method to determine prohibited boycotts.
AIPAC isn't an IGO, but it is an "organization that supports the boycotted country."
As far as I can tell, IGOs themselves aren't impacted or targeted in any way, anyway.
I'm no lawyer but the fact that AIPAC was found and funded domestically means you can BDS them all you want without this law affecting you. Unless I'm wrong.
No, you're missing the point. The IGO Boycott amendment adds in as a prohibited action, right there along with boycotting, that you can't draw attention to that someone is connected to an organization on the side that supports the country. Apparently under discrimination reasoning.
So it's not that you can't boycott AIPAC (they're not a country and, yes, they're technically domestic.) It's that, potentially, you could be violating the bill if you discriminate against someone by pointing out that they have a relationship with AIPAC.