In a surprising shift, former President Donald Trump has decided to reverse a policy that would have punished U.S. states for boycotting Israeli companies. The idea had been proposed earlier by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but was never fully implemented.

Trump’s new stance is being hailed as a victory for U.S. states that have chosen to support the boycott movement against certain Israeli businesses. In the past, some states had passed laws banning business with companies operating in Israel or its territories. But under Trump’s new decision, those states will no longer face federal penalties for such actions.

This reversal marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over the relationship between the U.S. and Israel. While the U.S. has long been a strong supporter of Israel, there has been growing concern in recent years about the treatment of Palestinians and Israel’s actions in disputed territories. Some states, especially in the U.S. Midwest and West, have expressed support for movements like the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which aims to challenge Israeli policies.

The decision comes at a time when former President Trump’s influence in American politics remains strong, despite his absence from the White House. In his statement, Trump said he wanted to give states more freedom to make their own decisions without the threat of federal intervention. “States should have the right to decide their policies, and I believe in empowering them to do so,” Trump said in a recent interview.

This change also follows recent developments where Trump was involved in discussions over disaster relief. The Biden administration had been criticized for its handling of disaster funds, but Trump weighed in with his own proposals on how federal assistance could be better managed. His actions regarding the Israeli boycott are seen as part of his broader push to assert more influence over state-level decisions.

Netanyahu’s original proposal for punishing states that boycott Israeli companies was seen as a controversial step by many. It sparked debates about freedom of expression and whether the U.S. government should intervene in matters related to Israel. Now, with Trump reversing that stance, it seems the issue will remain a contentious topic for future discussions on U.S.-Israel relations.

This new development is likely to continue to fuel debates about the role of government in influencing state policies and the larger question of how the U.S. should navigate its relationship with Israel in the coming years. For now, states will have more room to pursue their own policies regarding Israeli businesses and trade.