SB 1244 - This act requires a state agency to refer to Judea and Samaria in any official government material and to not use the term "West Bank". A state agency shall not use state moneys to create any official government material that refers to Judea and Samaria as "West Bank". The act authorizes the director of a state agency to waive the provisions of the act if it is in the best interests of the state and notice is provided to the President Pro Tem of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. JIM ERTLE

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Jill Carter

Missouri would require state agencies to replace "West Bank" with "Judea and Samaria" in all official materials, standardizing geopolitical terminology aligned with Israeli sovereignty claims.

Hearing Cancelled S General Laws Committee

Legislative bill overview

SB 1244 mandates that Missouri state agencies replace the term "West Bank" with "Judea and Samaria" in all official government materials, documents, and communications. The bill applies to state agencies' internal and external communications, effectively standardizing terminology across government operations.

Why is this important

This bill represents a state-level intervention in geopolitical terminology, directly affecting how Missouri government discusses a contested territory. It signals political alignment with Israeli sovereignty claims and could influence how state agencies communicate with constituents, international entities, and media regarding Middle Eastern policy matters.

Potential points of contention

Terminology dispute: "West Bank" is the internationally recognized term used by the UN, major governments, and academic institutions, while "Judea and Samaria" reflects Israeli historical and political naming conventions; mandating one over the other takes a position in an active territorial dispute

Government speech and neutrality: Critics may argue states shouldn't mandate specific geopolitical terminology in official materials, as this blurs the line between acknowledging a political viewpoint versus maintaining governmental neutrality on contested international issues

Practical implementation: The bill could create complications for state agencies communicating with federal partners, international organizations, and media that use standard international terminology, potentially causing confusion or requiring dual translation systems

Scope concerns: The breadth of "official government materials" is undefined, raising questions about whether this covers educational materials, legal documents, maps, and routine agency communications