IV 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 100 

Expressing the sense of Congress in opposition to the establishment of a 

new United States consulate or diplomatic mission in Jerusalem for 

outreach to Palestinians. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2022 

Mr. ZELDIN (for himself, Ms. SALAZAR, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. MOOLENAAR, Mr. 

BUDD, Mr. GIMENEZ, Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio, Mr. KUSTOFF, Mr. WEBER

of Texas, Mr. JACKSON, Mr. GARBARINO, Mrs. RODGERS of Washington, 

Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. CRAWFORD, Ms. HERRELL, Mrs. 

WAGNER, Mrs. BOEBERT, Mr. PERRY, Mr. NORMAN, Ms. STEFANIK, Mr. 

MEIJER, and Mr. CLINE) submitted the following concurrent resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress in opposition to the establishment of a new United States consulate or diplomatic 

mission in Jerusalem for outreach to Palestinians. 

Whereas the United States recognizes sovereign nations’ authority to designate their own capitals; 

Whereas Jerusalem has served as the diplomatic capital of 

Israel for decades and has remained the cultural center 

of Israel and of the Jewish people for millennia; 

Whereas large, bipartisan supermajorities in the Senate and 

the House of Representatives voted for the Jerusalem 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HCON 100 IH 

Embassy Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–45), which 

states, as the policy of the United States— 

(1) ‘‘Jerusalem should remain an undivided city’’; 

(2) ‘‘Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital 

of the State of Israel’’; and 

(3) ‘‘the United States Embassy in Israel should be 

established in Jerusalem’’; 

Whereas, in 2018, the Trump administration relocated the 

United States Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem in accordance with the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995; 

Whereas the Biden administration’s plan to open a United 

States consulate in Jerusalem for outreach to Palestinians could be viewed as a challenge to— 

(1) Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem; and 

(2) Jerusalem’s status as an undivided city; 

Whereas such plan has received bipartisan criticism among 

members of the Government of the United States and the 

Government of Israel; 

Whereas the Palestinian Authority has stated that the purpose of opening a United States consulate in Jerusalem 

for outreach to Palestinians is to divide the city; and 

Whereas the opening and maintenance of a new and unnecessary consulate in Jerusalem would require a substantial 

expenditure of American taxpayer funds: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that— 

3 (1) Congress opposes the establishment of a 

4 new United States consulate in Jerusalem for out5 reach to Palestinians; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HCON 100 IH 

1 (2) establishing such a consulate would violate 

2 the intent of the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995; 

3 (3) any establishment of a new consulate or 

4 diplomatic mission in Jerusalem should not move 

5 forward without congressional approval through the 

6 passage of new legislation; and 

7 (4) the presence of a United States diplomatic 

8 mission devoted to a non-state actor in Israel’s sov9 ereign capital would be an affront to the territorial 

10 integrity of a long-standing United States partner 

11 and ally. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS