In a stunning turn of events, the Trump administration has swiftly reversed a controversial policy that mandated U.S. states and cities to reject boycotts of Israeli companies in order to qualify for federal disaster funds. The decision, which ignited public outrage, was announced after a wave of criticism erupted following the initial memo’s release.

On Monday, the Department of Homeland Security removed language that required states to certify their commercial relations with Israeli businesses, a requirement that would have impacted at least $1.9 billion in federal aid designated for vital emergency services, including search and rescue operations. The abrupt policy shift underscores the administration’s response to mounting public fury, with critics labeling the original mandate as a dangerous politicization of disaster relief.

The deleted stipulation had positioned support for Israel as a precondition for federal funding, raising alarms about the prioritization of foreign interests over American citizens in times of crisis. Prominent voices, including political commentator Candace Owens, condemned the original policy as “treasonous,” arguing it undermined American sovereignty and interests.

The reversal marks a significant departure from the administration’s previous hardline stance against anti-Israel sentiment, reflecting a growing backlash against perceived overreach in federal policies. In a statement, Trisha McLoughlin from Homeland emphasized that FEMA grants should adhere to existing laws—not political litmus tests—reassuring the public that federal funds would not be tied to foreign relations.

As this story develops, the implications of this rapid policy change raise critical questions about the future of U.S. foreign relations and domestic funding priorities. The administration’s willingness to listen to public outcry may signal a shift in how federal policies will navigate the complex interplay of international relations and domestic welfare.