The bill would prohibit the use of the term 'West Bank' in any federally funded policy material, replacing it with 'Judea and Samaria.' It also directs Congress and federal agencies to adopt this terminology in a broad set of laws and programs, effectively changing how the United States refers to land annexed by Israel during the 1967 war. The measure adds a waiver mechanism administered by the Secretary of State and creates a sense-of-the-Congress finding on how the land should be named.
The impact would be felt across multiple statutes and agencies that currently reference the West Bank in official materials, guidance, or reporting.
At a Glance
What It Does
The act prohibits funds from being used to prepare or publish any materials that refer to Judea and Samaria as the 'West Bank,' with a treaty-exception. It requires replacing 'West Bank' with 'Judea and Samaria' in several listed statutes and directs conforming amendments across multiple laws.
Who It Affects
Federal agencies that generate policy documents and communications, including the State Department, USAID, and agencies responsible for international programs and diplomacy.
Why It Matters
It sets a standardized terminology for U.S. policy materials, potentially shaping diplomatic messaging and alignment with a perspective on the region. It also creates a broad, cross-cutting updating mandate that implicates multiple laws and agencies.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill starts by naming itself the Retiring the Egregious Confusion Over the Genuine Name of Israel’s Zone of Influence by Necessitating Government-use of Judea and Samaria Act. Section 2 expresses a sense of Congress that the land annexed by Israel in 1967 should be referred to by its historical names and that the term 'West Bank' should no longer be used in official government materials.
Section 3 imposes a prohibition: after enactment, no funds may be used to produce or disseminate government materials that refer to the area as the 'West Bank,' with a narrow exception for obligations under international treaties or agreements. It also allows the Secretary of State to waive the prohibition, provided the Secretary notifies Congress with an explanation within 30 days of the waiver.
Section 4 then makes a series of conforming amendments to a broad set of laws to substitute 'Judea and Samaria' for 'the West Bank' in headings and text across those statutes.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires replacing every instance of 'West Bank' with 'Judea and Samaria' in federal references where applicable.
A waiver mechanism lets the Secretary of State override the prohibition with an explanation to Congress within 30 days.
Conforming changes span multiple major statutes, including the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Taylor Force Act.
The law introduces a formal Sense of Congress about naming, reinforcing the preferred terminology.
The prohibition applies to federally funded materials but permits exceptions for international treaties or agreements.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short Title
This act may be cited as the RETIRING THE EGREGIOUS CONFUSION OVER THE GENUINE NAME OF ISRAEL’S ZONE OF INFLUENCE BY NECESSITATING GOVERNMENT-USE OF JUDEA AND SAMARIA ACT or the RECOGNIZING Judea and Samaria Act. The title signals the policy goal and provides the legal hook for the naming change across the statute book.
Sense of Congress
The section states the sense of the Congress that the land annexed by Israel during the 1967 Six-Day War should be referred to by its traditional names, Judea and Samaria, with the land south of Jerusalem as Judea and the land north of Jerusalem as Samaria. It also instructs that the term 'West Bank' should no longer be used in official government materials, steering agency practice and public messaging toward the preferred nomenclature.
Prohibition on Use of Materials that Use the Term 'West Bank'
This section bars any funds made available after enactment from being used to prepare or promulgate policy, guidance, regulations, notices, executive orders, materials, briefings, press releases, or other work products that refer to Judea and Samaria as the 'West Bank.' An exception exists for obligations under international treaties or agreements, preserving treaty compliance. The Secretary of State is granted a waiver authority, subject to a requirement to brief Congress with an explanation within 30 days after the waiver is made.
Conforming Changes to United States Law
The act requires a series of amendments to multiple laws, replacing every instance of 'the West Bank' with 'Judea and Samaria' in headings and text. The changes cover the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the Taylor Force Act, the Multinational Force and Observers Participation Resolution, the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986, the United States-Israel Free Trade Area Implementation Act of 1985, the 9/11 Commission Act, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 2003, and the Nita M. Lowey Middle East Partnership for Peace Act, among others. The amendments are designed to align U.S. law with the bill’s preferred terminology across a wide range of foreign and security-related authorities.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Foreign Affairs across all five countries.
Explore Foreign Affairs in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- State Department communications and policy staff gain a single, explicit naming convention for official materials, reducing ambiguity and signaling consistency in diplomacy.
- USAID and other international programs maintain uniform terminology in policy guidance and public-facing outputs, simplifying outreach and reporting.
- Legislative and oversight staff in Congress benefit from a cohesive, codified standard that streamlines monitoring and compliance across agencies.
- Israel advocacy groups and allied policymakers may prefer Judea and Samaria terminology, aligning U.S. messaging with a common framing.
- Researchers and think tanks tracking U.S. foreign policy gains a consistent reference framework, reducing interpretive variance across documents.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal agencies’ communications shops must update guidelines, training, and templates, incurring administrative and printing costs.
- Incremental costs to reprint materials, update websites, and revise public-facing content across multiple agencies.
- Potential diplomatic friction with international partners or domestic audiences who resist or contest the change in terminology.
- Oversight and reporting costs associated with monitoring waivers and ensuring compliance across the affected statutes.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between a strong preference for a singular, domestic naming convention and the practical realities of international diplomacy, treaty obligations, and bureaucratic implementation across numerous statutes.
The bill ambitiously standardizes terminology across a broad swath of federal law and practice, which could simplify internal policy discussions but also creates opportunities for friction with international norms and treaty language. The waiver mechanism introduces a built-in flexibility that courts or future administrations could leverage, potentially diluting the prohibition in practice.
The breadth of the conforming amendments raises questions about consistency in application across agencies and whether all relevant references have been identified and updated. Implementation costs and transition planning will be nontrivial, particularly for agencies with large volumes of policy materials and historical documents.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.