A HOUSE RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE JUDEA AND SAMARIA AS THE ANCESTRAL HEARTLAND OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE, TO AFFIRM THE HISTORICAL, BIBLICAL, AND LEGAL CONNECTION OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE TO JUDEA AND SAMARIA, TO REJECT THE POLITICIZED TERM "WEST BANK" AND TO STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE STATE OF ISRAEL.
H4865 is a House resolution expressing support for Israel and formally recognizing the regions historically referred to as Judea and Samaria as the ancestral heartland of the Jewish people. The resolution recites extensive biblical, historical, and legal claims to argue that those terms are the most accurate names for the area and that the term “West Bank” is a politicized label imposed during Jordanian control. It also frames the issue as part of a broader affirmation of Jewish sovereignty, religious liberty, and the Judeo-Christian heritage.
The resolution further urges South Carolina state agencies, departments, boards, commissions, and institutions to use “Judea and Samaria” instead of “West Bank” in official communications, publications, educational materials, and other governmental documents to the fullest extent practicable. It directs that copies of the resolution be sent to the Governor, Israel’s Prime Minister, the Israeli Ambassador to the United States, and South Carolina’s congressional delegation. As a resolution, it does not create a new regulatory program or criminal penalty, but it would influence state government language and official messaging if adopted and followed.
H4865 would not amend the South Carolina Code or create enforceable rights or obligations in the way a statute would; instead, it would express the House’s official position and encourage state entities to adopt specific terminology in government communications. Its practical effect would be symbolic and administrative, potentially affecting how state agencies, educational materials, and public documents refer to the Israeli-Palestinian territorial dispute. The resolution also serves as a diplomatic statement of solidarity with Israel and a rejection of the term “West Bank” in favor of “Judea and Samaria.”
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears strongly supportive of Israel and of the resolution’s framing of the territory. The measure is written in emphatic, affirmative language and presents its position as one of historical accuracy, moral clarity, and solidarity. No contrary viewpoints are documented in the supplied context, so there is no evidence here of formal opposition or amendment activity.
The main point of contention is the resolution’s rejection of the term “West Bank” and its call for state agencies to use “Judea and Samaria” instead. Supporters would likely view this as a correction of terminology and a statement of support for Israel, while critics could see it as taking a partisan stance on a highly disputed international issue and as endorsing one side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The resolution’s broad historical and legal assertions, including references to biblical claims and international mandates, are also likely to be disputed by those who view the territory through a different legal or diplomatic lens.