Arizona House Backs ‘Judea and Samaria’ Terminology in State Communications
The Arizona House of Representatives has approved two resolutions affirming Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and directing state agencies to replace the term “West Bank” with “Judea and Samaria” in official communications, a move that supporters frame as historical recognition but critics say reflects growing politicization of Middle East language inside US state politics.
Lawmakers passed the measures with bipartisan backing, arguing that terminology carries legal and cultural meaning. Republican Rep. David Livingston defended the vote, saying, “Today, the Arizona House chose accuracy over politics,” adding that the historical names are “central to Jewish history, faith, and national identity.”
The resolutions state that the terminology shift reflects Israel’s historical and legal claims while also linking the territory to US security interests by warning against the emergence of terrorist-controlled areas. Israeli Consul-General Israel Bachar welcomed the decision, calling the terminology “indigenous names” that affirm historical ties to the region.
Give the gift of hope
We practice what we preach:
accurate, fearless journalism. But we can't do it alone.
- On the ground in Gaza, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, and more
- Our program trained more than 100 journalists
- Calling out fake news and reporting real facts
- On the ground in Gaza, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, and more
- Our program trained more than 100 journalists
- Calling out fake news and reporting real facts
Join us.
Support The Media Line. Save democracy.
The vote fits into a broader trend of US state-level legislation tied to Israel policy. Arizona previously adopted laws requiring contractors to certify they do not support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement and later adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism. Analysts say such measures increasingly position state governments as active players in foreign policy debates traditionally handled at the federal level.
The resolutions arrive during a period of heightened international scrutiny over language surrounding Israeli-Palestinian issues, with many governments and organizations continuing to use “West Bank” as a geographic designation while Israeli officials and some US lawmakers favor biblical terminology.
Supporters argue the shift signals solidarity with Israel and reinforces historical narratives. Critics counter that symbolic legislation risks deepening partisan divides in US politics while complicating diplomatic messaging.
As debates over terminology intensify, Arizona’s decision illustrates how state legislatures are becoming arenas for broader geopolitical disputes that extend far beyond Washington or Jerusalem.
