Title: A concurrent resolution to express the sense of Congress in opposition to the establishment of a new Palestinian consulate or diplomatic mission in Jerusalem.
Policy area: International Affairs

Summary:
This concurrent resolution expresses the sense of Congress that (1) it opposes the establishment of a new Palestinian consulate in Jerusalem, (2) any establishment of a new consulate or diplomatic mission in Jerusalem should not move forward without congressional approval through the passage of new legislation, and (3) the presence of a United States diplomatic mission devoted to a non-state actor in Israel's sovereign capital would be an affront to the territorial integrity of a long-standing U.S. partner and ally.

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 34 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>






117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 34

To express the sense of Congress in opposition to the establishment of 
    a new Palestinian consulate or diplomatic mission in Jerusalem.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 22, 2022

  Mr. Lee (for himself, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Braun, Mr. Scott of Florida, 
 Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Ms. Ernst, Mr. Daines, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Marshall, Mr. 
   Hoeven, Mrs. Blackburn, and Mr. Boozman) submitted the following 
 concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 
                               Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION


 
To express the sense of Congress in opposition to the establishment of 
    a new Palestinian consulate or diplomatic mission in Jerusalem.

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 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 Palestinian consulate in 
        Jerusalem 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 United States Embassy in Jerusalem's Palestinian Affairs Unit 
        already manages, in a timely and effective manner, the proposed 
        responsibilities of the Biden administration's planned Palestinian 
        consulate in Jerusalem; 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
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) Congress opposes the establishment of a new Palestinian 
        consulate in Jerusalem;
            (2) establishing such a consulate would violate the intent 
        of the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995;
            (3) any establishment of a new consulate or diplomatic 
        mission in Jerusalem should not move forward without 
        congressional approval through the passage of new legislation; 
        and
            (4) the presence of a United States diplomatic mission 
        devoted to a non-state actor in Israel's sovereign capital 
        would be an affront to the territorial integrity of a long-
        standing United States partner and ally.
                                 <all>