Okay, so all of the framing (news stories, etc.; hell, even the title of this very thread) around this resolution appears to be WAY off.
First, the resolution opens with examples of boycotts used for domestic reasons before then highlighting examples of boycotts carried out to try & impact foreign policy.
More importantly, though, this resolution is pretty explicitly not endorsing a boycott or advocating for one (the full text is short & the link is directly above, so you can read the whole resolution to confirm). The resolved section: affirms that people have the right to boycott; says laws regulating boycotts are counter to the Constitution & established precedent; & calls on people to oppose anti-boycott laws.
Yes, Texas passed a law that punishes people for boycotting Israel so that's (understandably) where most people go with this, but Israel, BDS, & Palestine aren't mentioned or referenced in the text. In fact, the text is explicitly broader because this isn't the only ban. There are states also looking at ways of banning protests on campus. President Trump famously wants people fired for protesting the national anthem. You think the next step isn't laws? They explicitly mention flag burning in their examples (also cake baking).
Again, read the whole resolution; it's super short. Stop taking partisan political pundits screaming about it at their word, because saying Omar is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany in this resolution simply doesn't stand up to a reading of the text, as the text *DOES NOT COMPARE* anything. That's not even the purpose of the resolution, for crying out loud.
