End U.S. Support for Israel

The Moral Catastrophe of Unconditional Support

Between October 2023 and September 2025, the United States sent $21.7 billion in military aid to Israel and authorized over $30 billion in weapons deals.¹ This represents substantially more spending than any other single year since the U.S. began granting military aid to Israel in 1959.² This staggering sum funded the transfer of 57,000 artillery shells, 36,000 rounds of cannon ammunition, 13,981 anti-tank missiles, and 8,700 Mk 82 500-pound bombs.² In August 2024 alone, the Biden administration approved a $20 billion arms sale to Israel, including F-15 fighter jets and additional tank and mortar shells.² An additional $4.86 billion has supported stepped-up U.S. military operations in the region since the October 7, 2023 attacks.²

These American weapons have facilitated catastrophic human suffering. As of October 22, 2025, over 71,200 people—69,236 Palestinians and 1,983 Israelis—have been killed in the Gaza war.³ More than 50,000 children have reportedly been killed or injured since October 2023, with at least 20,000 children among the dead—1 child killed every hour for 24 months.⁴ The United Nations Office for the High Commissioner on Human Rights found that 70% of Palestinians killed in residential buildings were women and children.⁵ Overall, 44% of verified deaths were children according to UN analysis.⁵ Scholars estimate that 80% of Palestinians killed are civilians.³

The human toll extends beyond immediate deaths. 2,596 children have lost both parents, while 53,724 children have lost one parent—47,804 their fathers and 5,920 their mothers.⁶ The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine estimates that approximately 3% of Gaza’s population has died due to violence, with 59% of these deaths being women, children, and the elderly.⁷ The total traumatic injury death toll as of October 2024 likely exceeds 70,000 Palestinians.⁷

American taxpayer dollars should not fund human rights violations, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, or the killing of innocent people. We have a moral obligation to end all military funding and weapons transfers to Israel until it complies with United States law, international law, and basic human rights.

Congressional Action: The Block the Bombs Act

Representative Delia Ramirez of Illinois introduced the Block the Bombs Act (H.R. 3565) to halt the transfer of the most destructive and indiscriminate weapons systems to Israel.⁸ The legislation prohibits the sale of BLU-109 bunker buster bombs, 2,000-pound bombs, Joint Direct Attack Munitions guidance kits, 120mm tank rounds, and 155mm artillery shells.⁸ If the Israeli government wishes to use any of these weapons, it must first prove that it is not violating United States, international, and human rights law.⁸ The legislation would maintain defensive systems like the Iron Dome missile shield while conditioning offensive weapons transfers on human rights compliance.⁸

The Congressional Progressive Caucus—representing nearly 100 members in the House of Representatives—voted to endorse the Block the Bombs Act in September 2025.⁹ This marks the first time any major congressional caucus has backed legislation to end United States funding for Israel’s military operations.⁸ 50 members had already signed onto the House bill before the caucus endorsement, demonstrating growing congressional support for conditioning military aid on human rights compliance.⁹ Even former AIPAC-backed Democrats have signed on to this legislation, recognizing that unconditional support for Israeli military operations has become politically and morally untenable.¹⁰

The Block the Bombs Act represents a modest but crucial first step. It does not end all military aid to Israel. It does not impose economic sanctions. It merely requires that before the United States transfers weapons capable of destroying entire apartment buildings and killing dozens of civilians in a single strike, Israel must demonstrate compliance with the laws that supposedly govern American foreign policy. This represents the bare minimum standard of accountability that American values demand.

Recognizing Genocide: H.Res.876

H.Res.876, introduced in the 119th Congress, recognizes the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza.¹ The resolution documents the scale of U.S. complicity: between October 2023 and September 2025, the United States sent $21.7 billion in military aid to Israel and authorized over $30 billion in additional weapons deals.¹ This resolution represents a historic acknowledgment by members of Congress that the violence in Gaza meets the legal definition of genocide under international law.

The resolution calls for ceasing the transfer of arms and other equipment to Israel where there is reason to suspect their use in military operations that have involved or could involve the commission of genocide.¹ Supporting this resolution means acknowledging the reality of what American weapons have enabled and demanding accountability for violations of international humanitarian law. It means recognizing that continued weapons transfers make the United States complicit in genocide under the Genocide Convention.

Senate Action on Arms Conditioning

The Senate has witnessed parallel efforts to condition military aid to Israel. In July 2025, Senator Bernie Sanders introduced a pair of resolutions aimed at blocking over $675 million in arms sales to Israel.¹¹ While the Senate rejected these resolutions, for the first time a majority of Senate Democrats voted against weapons transfers to Israel.¹¹ 27 Democrats voted to block the sale of tens of thousands of assault rifles to Israel, while 24 Democrats voted to block the sale of 5,000 heavy bombs and guidance kits.¹¹ This represents a seismic shift in congressional attitudes toward unconditional military support for Israel, reflecting both changing political sentiment and mounting evidence of human rights violations.

Violations of United States Law: The Leahy Law

The Leahy Law prohibits the United States Government from using funds to assist units of foreign security forces where credible information implicates that unit in gross violations of human rights.¹² This law has been applied to foreign military units around the world—except Israel.¹³ Tim Rieser, who drafted the Leahy Law, states explicitly that “in its long history, the Leahy law has never been applied to Israel.”¹³ The State Department established a special process in 2020 specifically for Israel to identify units that have committed gross violations of human rights, yet to date there has not been a single finding that any Israeli unit has ever committed a gross violation.¹² This stands in stark contrast to documented evidence of systematic human rights abuses.

In May 2024, the State Department concluded it was likely that Israel used United States-supplied weapons in “incidents that raise concerns” about the country’s legal compliance.¹⁴ Charles Blaha, a former State Department official who oversaw Leahy Law implementation, reported that his office documented hundreds of potential Israeli violations.¹⁴ Yet none of these documented violations has resulted in the suspension of military aid as the law requires. The Biden administration carved out loopholes for Israel that give America’s close ally a pass on United States law restricting aid to foreign militaries over human rights abuses.¹⁵

A lawsuit filed in December 2024 by former State Department officials and crafters of the 1997 Leahy Law challenges this double standard.¹⁵ The lawsuit argues that the federal government is creating special loopholes for Israel despite reasonable evidence that it violated international law.¹⁵ Representatives Jim McGovern, Mark Pocan, Barbara Lee, Joaquin Castro, and Betty McCollum have urged the Biden administration to comply with existing United States law and stop assistance to Israeli military units accused of human rights violations.¹⁶ Yet these violations of American law continue, undermining the rule of law and the integrity of our human rights commitments.

AIPAC and DMFI Must Register as Foreign Lobbying Groups

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee and Democratic Majority for Israel wield enormous influence over American politics, spending millions to defeat progressive candidates who support Palestinian rights. In a single example, AIPAC spent $9 million and DMFI spent $500,000 to defeat Representative Cori Bush in a Democratic primary, punishing her for advocating basic human rights for Palestinians.¹⁷ This pattern of massive spending to influence American elections in service of a foreign government’s interests undermines democratic accountability and distorts policy outcomes.

Historical precedent establishes the basis for requiring AIPAC to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. In the early 1960s, Israel funneled $5 million—equivalent to more than $35 million in today’s currency—into United States propaganda and lobbying operations through the quasi-governmental Jewish Agency’s New York office into the American Zionist Council, which later reorganized as AIPAC.¹⁷ The Department of Justice under Attorney General Robert Kennedy ordered this organization to register as a foreign agent, but they reorganized to avoid FARA requirements and have evaded registration ever since.¹⁷

The Foreign Agents Registration Act requires organizations acting “at the order, request, or under the direction or control” of a foreign government to register as foreign agents.¹⁷ While AIPAC claims it does not receive money directly from the Israeli government, the organization’s mission explicitly centers on influencing United States policy in favor of a foreign nation. Its massive spending on American elections advances Israeli government interests, not American interests or the preferences of American voters.

AIPAC and DMFI should be required to register under FARA for three reasons. First, transparency demands that Americans have a right to know when foreign interests are influencing their elections and representatives. Second, accountability requires that foreign lobbying groups face stricter disclosure requirements and restrictions on campaign contributions that apply to other foreign agents. Third, democratic integrity prohibits any foreign government from exercising outsized influence over American domestic politics through nominally “American” lobbying groups that serve foreign interests.

Former Senator William Fulbright and former senior CIA official Victor Marchetti petitioned the Department of Justice to register AIPAC under FARA in 1988.¹⁷ That petition was ignored, allowing AIPAC to continue operating outside the legal framework that governs other foreign influence operations. It is long past time to revive that effort and bring AIPAC and DMFI under the same transparency and accountability requirements that apply to lobbying groups representing other foreign governments.

A Foreign Policy Guided by Human Rights

United States foreign policy must be guided by human rights, international law, and the dignity of all people—not by the financial interests of lobbying groups or the profit margins of arms manufacturers. We must end all military aid and weapons transfers to Israel until it complies with United States and international law. We must pass the Block the Bombs Act to establish basic accountability for weapons transfers. We must require AIPAC and DMFI to register as foreign lobbying groups under FARA, bringing transparency to foreign influence over American politics. We must pursue a just peace that respects the rights and humanity of all people in the region, recognizing that sustainable security requires justice, not military dominance.

This policy position does not constitute an attack on any religion or ethnicity. Many of the strongest voices for Palestinian rights come from Jewish Americans who recognize that supporting apartheid and ethnic cleansing betrays rather than honors Jewish values. Standing up for human rights, accountability, and the rule of law represents the highest expression of American values. Our moral credibility as a nation depends on whether we apply consistent standards to allies and adversaries alike, whether we honor our stated commitment to human rights when doing so proves inconvenient, and whether we choose the hard path of justice over the easy path of complicity.

The children killed by American bombs in Gaza demand better of us. The families destroyed by weapons stamped “Made in America” deserve accountability. The principles enshrined in our laws and treaties require enforcement. We must choose between our stated values and our current practice.

---

References