A bill to impose sanctions with respect to foreign persons that have facilitated Israeli settlement construction in the E1 area of the West Bank.
- Sponsor
- Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE]
- Committees
- Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 23, 2026
Bottom line
This bill seeks to use economic sanctions to deter and punish actions that facilitate Israeli settlement expansion in a specific, strategically sensitive area of the West Bank, aiming to preserve the viability of a future Palestinian state.
What it actually does
This bill mandates the President to impose sanctions on foreign persons involved in Israeli settlement construction, related infrastructure development, or the transfer of Israeli civilians into the E1 area of the West Bank. It also allows for discretionary sanctions on those who materially assist sanctioned persons, aiming to deter activities that undermine the viability of a future Palestinian state.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill aligns with long-standing U.S. foreign policy objectives of supporting a two-state solution and opposing actions that undermine peace, such as settlement expansion. They contend that construction in the E1 area specifically threatens Palestinian territorial contiguity and the viability of a future Palestinian state, making sanctions a necessary tool to uphold international law and U.S. interests.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that such sanctions interfere with Israeli sovereignty and security decisions, potentially harming the U.S.-Israel relationship. They may also contend that the bill could complicate future peace negotiations by imposing unilateral conditions, or that it unfairly targets Israeli actions while not addressing other factors that undermine peace.
The bill is concise and clearly written, making it accessible for a reader to understand its core intent and provisions within a short timeframe.
Section 1
Congressional Findings on Peace and Settlements
This section establishes Congress's view that U.S. security interests and foreign policy objectives are undermined by actions that threaten lasting peace, specifically citing Israeli settlement construction in the E1 area of the West Bank as inconsistent with international law and a threat to a future Palestinian state. It notes the August 13, 2025 approval of 3,401 housing units in E1.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue these findings clearly articulate the U.S. position against E1 settlement construction, providing a strong basis for the subsequent sanctions and reinforcing international norms.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that these findings are one-sided, failing to acknowledge Israeli security concerns or other factors impacting the peace process, and could be seen as prejudging the outcome of negotiations.
Tradeoffs
Balances the stated U.S. support for Israel's security with the commitment to a two-state solution and Palestinian self-determination, highlighting the tension created by settlement expansion.
Section 2(a)
Mandatory Sanctions for E1 Settlement Activities
This provision mandates the President to impose sanctions on foreign persons determined to be responsible for, complicit in, or directly engaged in the construction of Israeli settlements, units, or related structures in the E1 area. This includes bidding on tenders, signing development agreements, providing services, investing in facilitating infrastructure (roads, water, sewage, electricity), or organizing the transfer of Israeli civilians into these settlements. It also targets leaders of entities engaged in such activities.
Section 2(b)
Discretionary Sanctions for Material Support
This provision grants the President the discretion to impose sanctions on foreign persons who materially assist, sponsor, or provide financial, material, or technological support to any person already sanctioned under this section. It also applies to entities owned or controlled by, or acting on behalf of, sanctioned persons. This is a secondary sanctions mechanism.
Section 2(c)
Scope of Sanctions Authority
This section specifies that the sanctions described involve the exercise of all powers granted to the President under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to block and prohibit transactions in property and interests in property of sanctioned foreign persons if such property is in or comes within the United States, or is in the possession or control of a U.S. person.
Section 2(d)
Humanitarian and Intelligence Exceptions
This provision explicitly exempts transactions related to humanitarian assistance, including agricultural commodities, food, medicine, and medical devices, from the sanctions. It also exempts authorized intelligence activities of the United States.
Section 2(f)
Sanctions Termination Date
This section stipulates that the provisions of the section and any sanctions imposed under it will terminate automatically seven years after the date of the Act's enactment.
Defines "knowingly" to mean that a person had actual knowledge, or should have known, of the conduct, circumstance, or result.
Section 2(g)(2)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to place definitions at the end, but the "should have known" standard is a significant legal threshold.
Case for: Proponents argue that including "should have known" broadens the scope of accountability, preventing individuals and entities from claiming ignorance to evade sanctions for activities they reasonably ought to have been aware of. This strengthens enforcement.
Case against: Critics might argue that the "should have known" standard can be overly broad or ambiguous, potentially leading to sanctions against parties who did not have direct intent or explicit knowledge, increasing compliance burdens and the risk of unintended consequences for legitimate actors.
Estimated impact: Significantly impacts the burden of proof for imposing sanctions, potentially increasing the number of entities that could be targeted.