it’s the same as the state anti-bds laws so it won’t be challenged
and it’s hard to imagine it even being applied, imagine a firm that does contracts for the fucking Pentagon which supports BDS? that can’t be a real company.
good question. the wording of the free bit of the article just sounded like contracts but if they want to try to make private pension funds invest in israel this might be picking a fight
How does this hold up constitutionally?
It will be ever so slightly funny to see SCOTUS say that buying EPYC instead of Xeon for a data centre is antisemitic hate speech
it’s the same as the state anti-bds laws so it won’t be challenged
and it’s hard to imagine it even being applied, imagine a firm that does contracts for the fucking Pentagon which supports BDS? that can’t be a real company.
Could this impact IAM, UAW or CWA’s pension trust if they divested while representing weapons contractors?
good question. the wording of the free bit of the article just sounded like contracts but if they want to try to make private pension funds invest in israel this might be picking a fight
They are past giving a shit or even pretending to give a shit.
The Supreme Kangaroo Court will pretzel logic any damn thing Droopy Don wants.