Alabama's 2016 law prohibits a public entity in the state from entering into certain contracts with businesses unless the business certifies it is not currently engaged in, and will not engage in, the boycott of a person or entity based in or doing business with a jurisdiction with which the state enjoys open trade. The law does not apply if the company offers to provide the goods or services for at least 20% less than the lowest certifying company or if the contract is for less than $15,000.

Alaska's law would prohibit the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the company submits a written certification that it does not engage in a boycott of Israel. The law would not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have 10 or fewer employees.

Alaska's law, passed by Administrative Order after a similar bill failed to pass through the legislature, prohibits public agencies of the executive branch from contracting with a company if the company is engaged in a boycott of the State of Israel. The law applies to contracts of at least $100,000 for companies with 10 or more employees.

This law extended Arizona's existing Israel-focused anti-boycott law to state universities and community colleges, as well as their employee retirement funds.

Arizona's 2019 law amends the State's 2016 anti-boycott law (HB 2617) which was successfully challenged in federal court in Jordahl v. Brnovich. The amended bill states that a public entity may not enter into a contract with a for-profit company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The clause does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have fewer than 10 employees.

Arkansas's 2017 anti-boycott law states that a public entity may not enter into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The clause does not apply if either: the company offers to provide the services for at least 20% less than each other qualified company or if the contract has a total potential value of less than $1,000. The law also creates a blacklist of companies engaged in a boycott of Israel, making blacklisted companies subject to divestment by the State Treasurer and the State's retirement systems.

California's 2016 law requires state contractors bidding for, entering into or renewing contracts over $100,000 to certify that they are in compliance with pre-existing state anti-discrimination laws and that any policy they have against a nation or peoples, including but not limited to Israel, is not used to discriminate or is in violation of those state anti-discrimination laws.

Colorado's 2016 law requires the state to create a blacklist of for-profit entities that have economic prohibitions against Israel, including boycotts, and requires the state's pension funds to divest from blacklisted entities and prohibit it from making future investments in those entities.

Florida's law requires the state public fund to notify companies it places on its blacklist of companies that boycott Israel that they may be subject to divestment.

Florida's 2018 law expands the State's 2016 anti-boycott law. The prior law prohibited public entities from contracting with any company or non-profit that boycotts Israel for contracts exceeding $1 million. HB 545 removed the $1 million threshold. The bill also requires the state to create a blacklist of companies, including sole proprietorships, that boycott Israel and prohibits state pension funds from investing in blacklisted companies.

Georgia's 2021 law amends the State's 2016 anti-boycott law which was successfully challenged in federal court in Martin v. Wrigley. The amended bill states that a public entity may not enter into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The clause excludes sole proprietorships, companies employing five or fewer employees, and companies with contracts valued at less than $100,000.

Idaho's 2021 law prohibits state contracts with companies and non-profits unless they sign a written certification that they are not currently and will not for the duration of the contract engage in boycotts of the state of Israel or territories under its control. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or companies that have fewer than 10 employees.

Illinois's 2015 law requires the state to create a blacklist of companies that boycott Israel or territories controlled by Israel, and require the state’s pension funds to divest from those companies. Illinois was the first state in the U.S. to explicitly punish boycotts of Israel.

Indiana's 2016 law requires the state to create a blacklist of organizations, businesses, and other entities that engage in boycotts of Israel and requires the state's public pension funds to divest from the blacklisted companies.

Iowa's 2016 law requires the state to create a blacklist of businesses or business entities that are publicly traded, based out of the US, and boycott Israel or territories controlled by Israel. The law prohibits Iowa from contracting with or investing in blacklisted entities and makes it illegal for a public entity in the state of Iowa to invest or enter into a contract worth over $1,000 with a company that boycotts Israel.

Iowa's 2022 law ammends the state's existing anti-boycott legislation to explicitly include parent companies and affiliates of companies boycotting Israel, including entites based outside the US. The ammendment is intended to target Unilever, the parent company of ice cream brand Ben & Jerry's, which recently announced it will stop sales in the occupied West Bank.

Kansas's 2018 law amends the State's 2017 anti-boycott law (HB 2409) which was successfully challenged in federal court in Koontz v. Watson. The amended bill states that a public entity may not enter into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The clause excludes sole proprietorships, companies employing five or fewer employees, and companies with contracts valued at less than $100,000.

Kentucky's 2019 law prohibits the state from entering into contracts unless the contractor certifies that it is not currently engaged in, and will not engage in, the boycott of a person or entity based in or doing business with a jurisdiction with which the state enjoys open trade. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have five or fewer employees.

Louisiana's 2019 law states that executive branch agencies may not enter into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have five or fewer employees. The law codifies the Governor’s executive order made on May 22, 2018.

Maryland's 2017 executive order states that executive branch agencies may not enter into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The order also calls for all current state contracts to be evaluated and possibly terminated if they exist with companies that engage in a boycott of Israel.

Michigan's 2017 law prohibits state contracts with an individual or company that engages in a boycott of a person based in or doing business with a strategic partner. The law incorporates the definition of “strategic partner” from federal laws which focus solely on Israel.

Minnesota's 2017 law prohibits the state legislature and state agencies from contracting with vendors that discriminate against Israel or entities doing business in Israel, including a boycott of Israel. Vendors are required to provide written certification of their compliance for contracts valued at $1,000 or more. The law was subsequently amended to apply to contracts over $50,000.

Mississippi's 2019 law requires the state to draft a state-sponsored blacklist containing companies that boycott Israel and Israeli-controlled territories. The bill also prohibits investing state funds into companies on the list.

Missouri's 2020 law prohibits the state from entering into a contract with a company, including non-profits, unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have 10 or fewer employees.

Nebraska's law would prohibit the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the company submits a written certification that it does not engage in a boycott of Israel. The law would not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have 10 or fewer employees.

Nevada's 2017 law requires the state to create a blacklist of for-profit entities that boycott Israel and prohibits the state from contracting with or investing in the companies on the blacklist.

New Hampshire's law would require the state to create a blacklist of all companies that boycott Israel, disqualifying them from receiving state banking contracts. 

New Hampshire's law, passed by Executive Order after a similar bill failed to pass through the legislature, prohibits executive branch entities from investing in or contracting with companies that are engaged in a boycott of Israel.

New Hampshire's bill would prohibit the Executive Branch from investing in or contracting with companies that engage in a boycott of Israel.

New Jersey's 2016 law requires the state to create a blacklist of companies that boycott the goods, products, or businesses of Israel; boycotts those doing business with Israel; or boycotts companies operating in Israel or Israeli-controlled territory. The law requires the state to divest from blacklisted entities and prohibit it from making future investments in those entities.

New York's 2016 executive order requires the state to create a blacklist of all institutions and companies that are determined to participate in boycott, divestment or sanctions activity targeting Israel, either directly or through a parent or subsidiary. The executive order requires all state entities to divest all money or assets from any institution or company that is included in the list. New York's Senate introduced legislation in January, 2022, to upgrade the executive order to statute.

New York's law would require the state to create a blacklist of all companies that boycott Israel and require state entities to divest from blacklisted companies.

New York's law would require the state to create a blacklist of all companies that boycott Israel, disqualifying them from receiving state contracts or public investments.

New York's law would require the state to create a blacklist of all companies that boycott Israel, disqualifying them from receiving state banking contracts. The law would also require the state's pension funds to divest from blacklisted entities. 

North Carolina's 2017 law requires the state to draft a blacklist of companies and organizations that boycott Israel and Israeli-controlled territories. The law requires the state to divest from blacklisted entities and prohibits it from making future investments in those entities. The law also prohibits the state from entering into contracts over $1,000 with blacklisted companies.

North Dakota's law would prohibit the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the company submits a written certification that it does not engage in a boycott of Israel. The law would not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have 10 or fewer employees.

North Dakota's law prohibits the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the company submits a written certification that it does not engage in a boycott of Israel. The law applies to contracts valued at more than $100,000 with companies that have 10 or more employees. The law also prevents the state from adopting "any investment policy that would have the effect of requiring or inducing any person to boycott Israel."

Ohio's 2016 law prohibits the state from contracting with for-profit entities for supplies, equipment, or services unless the company certifies that it does not, and will not for the duration of the contract, engage in boycotts of Israel, including Israel-controlled territories, or any other jurisdiction with which the state enjoys free trade.

Oklahoma's 2020 law prohibits the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel or Israeli-controlled territories, and will not engage in a boycott for the duration of the contract. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000.

Pennsylvania's 2016 law prohibits the state from contracting with companies, organizations, and other entities for supplies, services, or construction unless the company certifies that it is not engaged in a boycott of a person or entity based in or doing business with a jurisdiction with which the state enjoys open trade. Israel is the only jurisdiction explicitly mentioned in the preamble of the bill.

Pennsylvania's bill would prohibit the State Treasurer and state retirement systems from boycotting or divesting from Israel. It would also prohibit funding to an institution of higher education that engages in a boycott against or divestment from Israel.

Rhode Island's 2016 law prohibits a public entity in the state from entering into certain contracts with businesses unless the business certifies it is not currently engaged in, and will not engage in, the boycott of a person or entity based in or doing business with a jurisdiction with which the state enjoys open trade. The law does not apply if the company offers to provide the goods or services for at least 20% less than the lowest certifying company or if the contract is for less than $10,000.

South Carolina's 2015 law prohibits a public entity in the state from entering into certain contracts with businesses unless the business certifies it is not currently engaged in, and will not engage in, the boycott of a person or entity based in or doing business with a jurisdiction with which the state enjoys open trade. The law does not apply if the company offers to provide the goods or services for at least 20% less than the lowest certifying company or for contract is for less than $10,000.

South Dakota's 2020 executive order states that executive branch agencies may not enter into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have fewer than five employees.

Tennessee's law prohibits the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the company submits a written certification that it does not have any "practice, policy, guidance, or directive that discriminates against a firearm entity or firearm trade association" and will not adopt such a practice for the duration of the contract. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $250,000 or to companies that have 10 or fewer employees.

Texas's 2019 law amends the state's 2017 anti-boycott bill (HB 89) which was successfully challenged in federal court in Amawi v. Pflugerville Independent School District. The amended bill requires the state to create a blacklist of all companies that boycott Israel and require state entities to divest from blacklisted companies. The law also prohibits public entities from entering into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The bill does not apply to sole proprietors, companies with fewer than 10 employees, and contracts worth less than $100,000.

Utah's law amends the state's existing Israel-focused anti-boycott law. It prohibits the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the company submits a written certification that it does not engage in a boycott of Israel, a boycott of the fossil fuel, timber, mining, agriculture or firearms industries or a boycott of a company over its failure to meet environmental standards, or failure to provide gender-affirming care or reproductive health benefits. The law would not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have 10 or fewer employees.

Utah's 2021 law prohibits the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel and will not engage in a boycott of Israel for the duration of the contract. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have fewer than 10 full-time employees.

Virginia's bill would prohibit the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the company submits a written certification that it does not engage in a boycott of Israel or an entity doing business with or in Israel. The requirement would apply to contracts over $100,000 as well as subcontracts related to the contract in excess of $10,000.

West Virginia's 2021 law prohibits the state from entering into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel or territories it controls and will not engage in a boycott of Israel or territories it controls for the duration of the contract. The law does not apply to contracts valued at less than $100,000 or to companies that have fewer than 10 full-time employees.

Wisconsin's 2018 law prohibits the state from entering into a contract with any non governmental entity unless the contract includes a written certification that the nongovernmental entity is not currently engaged in a boycott of Israel or territories it controls and will not engage in a boycott of Israel or territories it controls for the duration of the contract.

This federal law would amend existing federal anti-boycott legislation to criminalize participation in, compliance with or the furnishing of information regarding boycotts of "countries friendly to the United States" by "international governmental organizations." This proposed amendment is intended to target efforts by the United Nations Human Rights Office and other international organizations to track companies involved in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

This federal law would prohibit federal agencies from entering into a contract with a company unless the contract includes a written certification that the company is not engaged in a boycott of Israel. The law applies to contracts valued at more than $100,000 with companies that have 10 or more employees.