#346 Gene Wu; TX SB17 Hearing; Land Restrictions; ICE Crackdown; Science Reports; Fed Data+

In This Issue #346

·        Committee of 100 Condemns Loyalty Attacks on Texas Rep. Gene Wu

·        08/14 Public Court Hearing on Lawsuit Against Texas Alien Land Bill SB17

·        Restrictions on Chinese Land Ownership in the U.S.

·        Concerns Over ICE Crackdown Tactics

·        Science: NIH Funding and Editorial on Columbia Deal

·        Federal Data at Risk: NASEM Warning, IRS Clash, and BLS Firing

·        News and Activities for the Communities

Committee of 100 Condemns Loyalty Attacks on Texas Rep. Gene Wu

On April 8, 2025, the Committee of 100 issued a public statement on Respectful Civil Discourse, condemning rhetoric that questions the loyalty or belonging of Chinese Americans based on ethnicity or political views. The statement cited an August 6 Texas Tribune article reporting that Texas State Senator Mayes Middleton targeted Representative Gene Wu 吳元之, linking him to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and suggesting he should “go back to China.”

“Suggesting that an American lawmaker is aligned with a foreign regime because of his heritage or political advocacy draws on a long and dangerous history of anti-Asian scapegoating and racism in this country,” the Committee of 100 said. “Such statements are outrageous and un-American. Disagreements on public policy are part of a healthy democracy. But invoking race, ethnicity, or foreign associations—especially when aimed at Asian American elected officials—incites xenophobia, invites slurs, and increases the potential for real-world harm.”

Wu, leader of the Texas House Democrats, recounted his family’s persecution during China’s Cultural Revolution, noting that accusations of being a “communist spy” are deeply offensive given his family history. In recent months, he has faced escalating racist attacks from GOP officials amid his role in blocking Republican-led redistricting. Republican leaders, including Middleton and Texas GOP Chair Abraham George, have publicly questioned Wu’s loyalty, labeling him “CCP Wu” and accusing him on social media of being an operative of the Chinese Communist Party doing China’s bidding in the Legislature while baselessly questioning his loyalty to Texas and the U.S.

Democrats and Asian American leaders warn that such unchecked rhetoric is dangerous, especially as Texas’s Asian American population grows rapidly. In contrast to past instances when racist remarks prompted swift condemnation, top GOP leaders have remained largely silent—signaling a troubling erosion of norms around respectful public discourse.

08/14 Public Court Hearing on Lawsuit Against Texas Alien Land Bill SB17

On July 3, 2025, the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA 华美维权同盟) filed a lawsuit on behalf of three Chinese nationals alleging Texas state law (SB 17), barring Chinese citizens from buying property in the state, is discriminatory and unconstitutional.A public hearing on Wang v. Paxton (4:25-cv-03103) will be held on August 14, 2025, starting at 10:00 am CT at Bob Casey U.S. Courthouse 515 Rusk Avenue, Houston, TX 77002.CALDA is calling on community members to attend the court hearing.  “Even just quietly sitting in the back of the courtroom, your presence is the strongest form of support,” CALDA’s call to action states. “This is not only a legal battle but a fight for our right to live with dignity on this land.”The hearing is open to the public, but with only a few dozen seats expected to be available. Standing in the courtroom is not allowed. It is recommended to arrive at least 30 minutes early and enter after passing security screening.  The court strictly prohibits carrying any electronic devices, including mobile phones, tablets, laptops, etc. Photography, video recording, and audio recording are forbidden. Lockers are provided at the court entrance for storage.  The hearing is expected to last 30 to 60 minutes. During this time, attendees must not enter or leave freely, talk, or create noise. Please obey the rules; violators may be removed by court officers.CALDA’s lawsuit compares Texas’s SB 17 law to historically notorious anti-Asian laws like the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act and California’s 1913 Alien Land Law, both targeting Asian immigrants. Texas had repealed similar discriminatory restrictions in 1965, deeming them unreasonable and discriminatory. SB 17 bans citizens of certain countries—unless they are U.S. citizens or permanent residents—from owning most real estate or signing leases longer than one year in Texas. The law applies even to long-term residents with valid student or work visas, treating them as if they still reside in their country of origin. Violators risk forced property sales, felony charges, imprisonment, and hefty fines.CALDA contends that SB 17 is not an isolated law; it equates “place of birth” with a “national security threat,” treating people of Chinese origin as potential enemies. This is not merely a restriction on foreign nationals but a form of systemic discrimination that marginalizes the entire Chinese community. U.S. history has long shown that once prejudice based on nationality takes root, it spreads and harms the innocent.  Among these waves of legislation, SB 17 is neither the beginning nor the end. It is part of a nationwide surge of anti-Chinese laws. We cannot remain silent, retreat, or be absent.SB 17 is set to take effect September 1, 2025.  The plaintiffs request the court to rule that SB 17 is preempted by federal law and unconstitutional, to issue temporary and permanent injunctions preventing its enforcement, and to order payment of attorney’s fees and related litigation costs.

Restrictions on Chinese Land Ownership in the U.S.

Author: Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications AssociateAccording to Nikkei Asia, the U.S. is intensifying its crackdown on Chinese ownership of American agricultural land in the name of national security. Legislative efforts at both the federal and state levels to restrict Chinese property ownership have reached an all-time high.According to a recently released report by the Committee of 100, U.S. Congress is currently considering 15 alien land bills, and 25 states have passed similar legislation aimed at restricting foreign ownership of property, including but not limited to agricultural land. This year alone, 11 such bills have already been enacted into law, with 129 introduced.Last month, the Department of Agriculture released a seven-point national security plan, enhancing public disclosures of foreign ownership of farmland and working with Congress and states to ban purchases of farmland by foreign adversaries and countries of concern. Agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins pointed specifically to the ownership of American farmland by Chinese nationals as an existential threat. Rollins hinted she might “claw back” land currently owned by Chinese investors.In May, Texas passed Senate Bill 17, prohibiting people and companies from China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia from purchasing land and other property in the state. It also bars certain people from leasing homes or apartments for more than a year. ACLU Texas maintains this legislation violates the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause.Florida passed similar legislation in 2023 that bans Chinese citizens from buying most property in the state. The law went into effect on July 1, 2023, although enforcement has been curtailed in specific cases pending legal review. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a temporary injunction blocking the law’s enforcement against two plaintiffs while their appeal is under consideration.In April, West Virginia enacted House Bill 2961, explicitly banning Chinese citizens who are not U.S. citizens or permanent residents from owning or possessing real property or mineral rights within the state. Speaking at the August 2025 APA Justice monthly meeting, Joanna YangQing Derman of Advancing Justice | AAJC explained that, while the legislation defines “prohibited foreign party” as individuals from China, the actual ban applies to individuals acting on behalf of companies and does not ban individuals from directly renting or purchasing land for themselves. The bill specifies that a violation of the law allows six months for full divestment of the sale, enforceable by the state court system and the West Virginia attorney general.The Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA) represents plaintiffs in lawsuits against the legislation in Florida and Texas. CALDA legal director, Justin Sadowsky, says “the purpose [of the legislation] appears to be harming Chinese people.”Vincent Wang, chair of the Ohio Chinese American Association (OCAA) and APA Justice co-organizer, has been working with Ohio legislators with OCAA to amend proposed legislation in Ohio. The legislation, House Bill 1 and Senate Bill 88, would bar U.S. permanent residents from China from purchasing homes or businesses within 25 miles of military bases or critical infrastructure, such as water treatment plants, pipelines, dams, and telecommunication systems.Wang says he and his group have tried to relay to lawmakers the impact the legislation will have on business, employment, and investment in the state. Wang estimates roughly 110,000 people could be impacted if the legislation passes.He added, “While China is on the U.S. ‘foreign adversary’ list, conflating the Chinese government with people of Chinese origin risks racial profiling and discrimination — harming innocent individuals and businesses without meaningfully advancing national security.”Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland dropped last year to 265,000 acres, near the 2019 level, accounting for 0.03% of the 876 million acres nationwide. According to Sarah Bauerle Danzman, a former foreign investment analyst with the State Department and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, such a miniscule proportion poses no national security threat.

Concerns Over ICE Crackdown Tactics

Author: Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications AssociateAccording to CNN, AsAmNews, and multiple media reports, Yeonsoo Go, a 20-year-old South Korean at Purdue University’s College of Pharmacy, was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on July 31. Five days later, August 4, she was released and reunited with her mother in Federal Plaza in New York.In 2021, Go moved to the U.S. with her mother on a religious worker’s dependent visa. Three years later, she graduated from Scarsdale High School, located in Westchester County, New York. Go’s mother, the Rev. Kyrie Kim, serves as a priest in the Asian ministry of the Episcopal Diocese in New York and is recognized as the first woman ordained in the Seoul Diocese of the Anglican Church of Korea.On July 31, 2025, Go attended a visa hearing in Manhattan with her mother, during which a judge scheduled a hearing for October. However, ICE agents arrested her outside the courthouse immediately after the hearing. She was first held at a nearby federal detention site, then transferred to a facility in Monroe, Louisiana. ICE has not provided an explanation for why she was placed in immigration detention.According to Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin, Go had overstayed a visa that “expired more than two years ago” and was placed in expedited removal proceedings. McLaughlin added, “The fact of the matter is those who are in our country illegally have a choice — they can leave the country voluntarily or be arrested and deported.”However, Go’s current visa is reported to be valid until December, and her hearing on July 31 was part of an effort to extend her status, raising serious questions about the legality and appropriateness of her detention.On August 2, supporters called for Go’s release during a gathering in Manhattan’s Federal Plaza. Friends spoke of her positive attitude and kind heart, noting that Go had been increasingly nervous leading up to her hearing given the current political climate.A Purdue University spokesperson Trevor Peters confirmed the university was aware of the situation and that the dean of students had reached out to Go’s family.Following her release, Republican Representative Mike Lawler wrote on X “Yeonsoo’s case is yet another example of why we must fix our broken immigration system and make it easier for folks to come here and stay, the right way.”Go’s detainment comes just over a week after Tae Heung "Will" Kim, PhD student at Texas A&M University, was first detained at San Francisco International Airport. Kim spent a week sleeping in a chair with the lights on 24/7, before being moved to immigration detention centers in Arizona and then Raymondville, Texas. Kim was denied access to counsel while he was held in San Francisco.Karl Krooth, Kim’s attorney, stated that his client’s detention underscores serious flaws in the immigration system. He noted that Kim was deprived of due process protections typically available through immigration court proceedings, and held in an airport under questionable authority. “CBP [Customs and Border Protection] officers are not neutral arbiters — they are interrogators,” Krooth said.Becky Belcore, co-director of National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (NAKASEC), says Kim’s prolonged detention is indicative of a larger crackdown on immigrants’ rights. Earlier in July, Muhanad J. M. Alshrouf was detained by immigration officials for nine days at George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, TX.  Alshrouf had a valid visa and had no criminal history. CBP officials have not provided reasoning why he was detained.Similarly, CBP officials held naturalized citizen Wilmer Chavarria, a Vermont school district superintendent, at George Bush Intercontinental Airport for hours on July 21, searching his electronic devices. Chavarria was returning from a trip to Nicaragua where he visited family.On August 8, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) addressed a letter to Kristi Noem, Todd Lyons, and Rodney Scott expressing deep concern over the treatment of lawful permanent resident AAPI individuals by CBP and ICE. They pointed to several reports in which individuals — Will Kim, Yeonsoo Go, Lewelyn Dixon, Maximo Londonio, and Yunseo Chung — were detained without due process, suggesting potential violations of constitutional protections.

CAPAC also alleges that CBP has violated its own National Standards on Transport, Escort, Detention, and Search, which requires CBP officials to “hold detainees for the least amount of time required” and, generally, for no more than 72 hours. The cases cited by CAPAC exemplify how CPB has purportedly failed to uphold this code.The CAPAC letter underscores growing concerns about the protection of constitutional rights, serving as a reminder of the importance of transparency, accountability, and adherence to due process. Upholding these principles helps ensure that enforcement practices remain fair and that the rights and dignity of immigrant communities are respected. Breaking News:  According to the Intercept, a 32-year-old Chinese immigrant named Chaofeng Ge died by suicide in the Moshannon Valley Processing Center, a privately run ICE detention facility in Pennsylvania. Ge had been detained there for five days after being handed over to ICE following a guilty plea for a credit card fraud-related arrest. The Moshannon facility, operated by the GEO Group and the largest ICE detention center in the Northeast, has faced numerous complaints about abusive conditions, including poor language services that leave detainees, especially Chinese speakers, isolated.Ge was found hanging in a shower room early on August 6, 2025, and despite emergency medical efforts, he was pronounced dead around 6 a.m. His death marks the first ICE detainee death in the Northeast this fiscal year and the third suicide in ICE facilities nationwide this year.The Moshannon center has come under scrutiny for overcrowding, lack of adequate medical and mental health care, and harsh conditions that resemble a prison rather than a temporary holding center. A 2024 Department of Homeland Security investigation found “egregious and unconstitutional conditions,” but its findings were largely ignored after oversight offices were closed.Nationwide, deaths in ICE detention have increased sharply this fiscal year, with 12 detainee deaths reported as of June 2025—more than the previous year and the highest since the COVID-19 pandemic began. The rise in deaths highlights ongoing concerns over ICE detention conditions and treatment of immigrants.

Science: NIH Funding and Editorial on Columbia Deal

According to Science on July 31, 2025, The Senate Appropriations Committee rejected President Trump’s proposed 40% cut to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and major reductions to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), instead approving a 2026 funding bill that boosts NIH’s base budget by $400 million (1%) to $47.2 billion and keeps the CDC at $9.15 billion. The bill preserves NIH’s 27 institutes, blocks a cap on indirect research costs, and funds targeted research areas such as cancer and Alzheimer’s. Lawmakers from both parties criticized the administration’s attempts to freeze funds and reorganize agencies, framing the measure as a strong bipartisan defense of biomedical research and public health.

The Senate bill must still go to the full Senate for approval and be reconciled with a House of Representatives version.

According to a Science editorial titled “The Columbia deal is a tragic wake-up call” on July 31, 2025, Columbia University has entered into an agreement with the U.S. government to restore $1.3 billion in annual research funding after the Trump administration raised concerns about antisemitism, admissions practices, faculty hiring, and campus protests. While university leaders framed the deal as a necessary step to free up critical science funding—emphasizing its importance for advancing research that benefits the nation and humanity—it imposes obligations far beyond research oversight. The terms focus heavily on undergraduate education and require Columbia to answer questions on a range of politically sensitive topics. 

Michael Roth, the president of Wesleyan University, who has been an outspoken critic of the Trump administration and has decried the timidity of universities in standing up for higher education, declined to criticize Columbia for entering the agreement, likening it to a parent who understandably had to pay a ransom for their kidnapped child. Many in academia believe that Columbia’s decision has put other universities at risk of being required to meet the same kind of demands.

The Columbia case underscores the vulnerability of universities that have become deeply reliant on federal research funding since World War II, often prioritizing financial growth and prestige over safeguarding academic independence. It also illustrates the difficult trade-offs administrators face when balancing core educational principles against the need to secure resources. While Columbia opted to negotiate rather than challenge the government, Brown University has followed a similar path, and Harvard University is fighting its own dispute in court. The real danger, some warn, is that such political and financial pressures—combined with heightened scrutiny of teaching and scholarship—could erode the fundamental mission of higher education: preparing future generations for the public good.

Federal Data at Risk: NASEM Warning, IRS Clash, and BLS Firing

On August 8, 2025, Marcia McNutt, President of the National Academy of Sciences, and Victor J. Dzau, President of National Academy of Medicine, issued a public statement, emphasizing that federal statistical agencies must remain free from political or other undue influence to maintain public trust and ensure effective decision-making. They highlighted the critical role accurate, objective data plays for businesses, governments, and the public, and reaffirmed long-standing principles—articulated since 1992—requiring agencies to operate independently of political agendas. The statement urges federal leaders to protect the integrity, objectivity, and statutory safeguards that enable these agencies to serve the nation impartially and in the public interest.

Related Resources: Principles and Practices for a Federal Statistical Agency: Eighth Edition

On August 9, 2025, the Washington Post reported that tensions erupted between the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the White House after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) asked the IRS to use confidential taxpayer data to locate 40,000 suspected undocumented immigrants. IRS privacy lawyers had opposed the April data-sharing agreement, and Commissioner Billy Long limited cooperation, verifying fewer than 3% of names and refusing to share additional information such as Earned Income Tax Credit claims, citing privacy laws. DHS has suggested future requests could target up to 7 million people.  The dispute occurred hours before Long’s abrupt removal as IRS commissioner, though it is unclear if it was a direct cause. Long, a former congressman appointed in June, will become ambassador to Iceland, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent serving as interim commissioner. His short tenure also saw clashes over delaying tax season and eliminating the IRS’s Direct File program. This episode illustrates the type of political pressure NASEM warns could undermine public trust in federal agencies.

On August 1, 2025, President Donald Trump fired Dr. Erika McEntarfer from her role as the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after alleging the jobs report was “rigged” to harm him and Republicans. In a statement issued by the Economic Policy Institute, Heidi Shierholz, President of EPI, called the claim “preposterous” and warned the move risks politicizing the office of Commissioner by threatening removal if economic data displeases the White House.

Taken together, these developments underscore a growing pattern of political interference in statistical and data-driven agencies — a trend that, if unchecked, could erode public confidence in the integrity of government information.

News and Activities for the Communities

1. APA Justice Community Calendar

Upcoming Events:2025/08/11 Committee of 100 Conversations – “Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes” with Gary Locke2025/08/12 Teaching and Researching Controversial Topics in the Sciences2025/08/14 Court Hearing on Wang v. Paxton (4:25-cv-03103)2025/09/06 The 2025 Asian American Youth Symposium2025/09/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/09/08 Committee of 100 Conversations – “Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes” with Janet YangVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details.

# # # 

APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community.  For more information, please refer to the new APA Justice website under development at www.apajusticetaskforce.org. We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org.