IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 496 

Affirming that all Americans have the right to participate in boycotts in 

pursuit of civil and human rights at home and abroad, as protected 

by the First Amendment to the Constitution. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 16, 2019 

Ms. OMAR (for herself, Ms. TLAIB, and Mr. LEWIS) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Affirming that all Americans have the right to participate 

in boycotts in pursuit of civil and human rights at home 

and abroad, as protected by the First Amendment to 

the Constitution. 

Whereas boycotts have been effectively used in the United 

States by advocates for equal rights since the Boston Tea 

Party and include boycotts led by civil rights activists 

during the 1950s and 1960s in order to advocate for racial equality, such as the Montgomery bus boycott, and 

promote workers’ rights, such as the United Farm Workers-led boycott of table grapes; 

Whereas Americans of conscience have a proud history of 

participating in boycotts to advocate for human rights 

abroad, including— 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 496 IH 

(1) attempting to slow Japanese aggression in the 

Pacific by boycotting Imperial Japan in 1937 and 1938; 

(2) boycotting Nazi Germany from March 1933 to 

October 1941 in response to the dehumanization of the 

Jewish people in the lead-up to the Holocaust; 

(3) the United States Olympic Committee boycotting 

the 1980 summer Olympics in Moscow in protest of the 

Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the preceding year; and 

(4) leading the campaign in the 1980s to boycott 

South African goods in opposition to apartheid in that 

country; 

Whereas the Supreme Court, in the 1966 case Rosenblatt v. 

Baer, held that the First Amendment to the Constitution 

ensures that ‘‘[c]riticism of government is at the very 

center of the constitutionally protected area of free discussion’’; 

Whereas the Supreme Court held in the 1982 case NAACP 

v. Claiborne Hardware that ‘‘[t]he right of the States to 

regulate economic activity could not justify a complete 

prohibition against a nonviolent, politically motivated 

boycott . . . .’’; 

Whereas the Supreme Court has recognized various activities 

as ‘‘expressive conduct’’ warranting constitutional protection, such as flag burning, wearing black armbands, silent sit-ins, and creating and designing custom wedding 

cakes; and 

Whereas despite this tradition, governments and nongovernmental organizations alike have sought to criminalize, 

stigmatize, and delegitimize the use of boycotts in an attempt to stifle constitutionally protected political expression: Now, therefore, be it 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 496 IH 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) affirms that all Americans have the right to 

3 participate in boycotts in pursuit of civil and human 

4 rights at home and abroad, as protected by the First 

5 Amendment to the Constitution; 

6 (2) opposes unconstitutional legislative efforts 

7 to limit the use of boycotts to further civil rights at 

8 home and abroad; and 

9 (3) urges Congress, States, and civil rights 

10 leaders from all communities to endeavor to preserve 

11 the freedom of advocacy for all by opposing 

12 antiboycott resolutions and legislation. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS