Racial Profiling Alien Land Bills Alien land bills, also known as alien land laws upon passage, have historically restricted the landownership and property rights of immigrants, particularly those of Asian descent. They are being revived today. Dive into the issue Latest developments Court Hearing and A New Movement Emerges This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Lawsuit Against Florida Senate Bill 264 This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Texas House Bill 1075 and Senate Bill 552 This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Campaign to Oppose The Nomination of Casey Arrowood This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. More News Research Grant Politicization Research grants to organizations and academics with Chinese ties have become politicized, posing a threat to apolitical, peer-reviewed science. Learn More Chinese Exclusion Act The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1882, which Iowa Congressman John Kasson described as "one of the most vulgar forms of barbarism." Learn More Learn more about related issues Featured: Interactive map Tracking Alien Land Bills The Committee of 100 launched an alien land bill tracker and a companion interactive map on December 15, 2023. This database tracks and maps state and federal bills that target property ownership by non-citizens, particularly from countries like China. These resources are updated four times a year in March, July, October, and December. Committee of 100: 2024 Alien Land Bill Tracker and Map Committee of 100: 2023 Alien Land Bill Tracker and Map In early 2023, APA Justice launched an interactive Alien Land Bill tracker with an interactive map to monitor restrictive state land ownership legislation. Following collaborative efforts, the Committee of 100 launched its own Alien Land Bill tracker and interactive map on December 15, 2023. Subsequently, APA Justice discontinued updates to its original tracker and map. As of May 28, 2023, there are 33 states known to have introduced some form of alien land and property bills in the current or recent legislative session. A few had passed and signed into state law; some have died; others were still pending. Original state-by-state links to the legislations and map were provided as community resources. They were collected from multiple sources including research by APA Justice, Advancing Justice | AAJC, Committee of 100, National Agricultural Law Center, Project South, media reports, and crowdsourcing. California's 1913 Alien Land Law During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 3, 2023, Paula Madison, businesswoman and retired executive from NBCUniversal, proposed a proactive and assertive national media alert network for the Asian American community. The idea was prompted by the challenge of Texas Senate Bill 147 (SB147) and the revival of discriminatory alien land bills. While this bill was introduced in Texas, the implications nationally and globally were huge. It was decided that a roundtable will be convened to further discuss the development and implementation of the concept and strategies for the near term and the longer term. Following a discussion with the Asian American Journalists Association on April 10, 2023, the virtual Inaugural Roundtable was hosted by APA Justice on April 17, 2023. April 2023 Meeting Apr. 3rd 2023 National Media Network Read More According to the Equal Justice Initiative , on May 3, 1913, California enacted the Alien Land Law, barring Asian immigrants from owning land. California tightened the law further in 1920 and 1923, barring the leasing of land and land ownership by American-born children of Asian immigrant parents or by corporations controlled by Asian immigrants. The 1913 California Alien Land Law was one of the earliest and most influential U.S. laws specifically restricting Asian immigrants' land ownership rights. Anti-Asian land restrictions had been developing, especially on the West Coast, influenced by widespread anti-Asian sentiment. California's law became a model for similar legislation in other states. California did not stand alone. Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming all enacted discriminatory laws restricting Asians’ rights to hold land in America. In 1923, the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed various versions of the discriminatory land laws—and upheld every single one. Most of these discriminatory state laws remained in place until the 1950s, and some even longer. California's 1913 Alien Land Law According to the Equal Justice Initiative , on May 3, 1913, California enacted the Alien Land Law, barring Asian immigrants from owning land. California tightened the law further in 1920 and 1923, barring the leasing of land and land ownership by American-born children of Asian immigrant parents or by corporations controlled by Asian immigrants. The 1913 California Alien Land Law was one of the earliest and most influential U.S. laws specifically restricting Asian immigrants' land ownership rights. Anti-Asian land restrictions had been developing, especially on the West Coast, influenced by widespread anti-Asian sentiment. California's law became a model for similar legislation in other states. California did not stand alone. Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming all enacted discriminatory laws restricting Asians’ rights to hold land in America. In 1923, the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed various versions of the discriminatory land laws—and upheld every single one. Most of these discriminatory state laws remained in place until the 1950s, and some even longer.

Am I required to answer? Mostly, no. You are generally not required to answer FBI or police questions (except, e.g., if you are asked for identification while driving a vehicle). Do I have the right to consult an attorney first? Yes. You have a right to talk to an attorney. If an FBI agent or police officer asks to speak to you, tell him or her that you want to consult with an attorney first. If you want to talk to the FBI or police, your attorney can respond on your behalf to set up an interview. Can information I give to the FBI without an attorney be harmful? Yes. ANY information you give to an officer without an attorney, even if it seems harmless, can be used against you or someone else. Lying to a federal officer is a crime. Remaining silent is NOT a crime (except in limited situations when you can be required to identify yourself). Am I required to allow the officer into my home? You are NOT required to allow the officer into your home without a warrant. Ask to see the warrant. If the officer does not have one, you do not have to let him/her into your home. However, do not try to stop him/her if he forces his way into your home or office. Simply state that they do not have your permission to enter. Do I have the right to see a warrant if the officer says that they have one? Yes. If the officer says that they have a warrant for your arrest, you have a right to see the warrant. You must go with the officer, but you do not have to answer questions until you consult an attorney. What should I do if I am detained? If you are detained, you should ask for an attorney and remain silent. What are my rights at the airport? Learn about your rights at the airport here . Questioned by the FBI or police? This is a letter to persons who believe they might be contacted by their employer, a funder, or government officials regarding their relationship to the People’s Republic of China. This includes, for example, university professors who have received grants to support their academic activities; researchers in STEM fields working in the private sector; civil servants; and even U.S. military personnel. It also includes individuals regardless of citizenship; holding a green card, having naturalized, or even being a native-born citizen will not protect you from potential problems. The most important message here is: if you have any concerns at all, you should consult with a lawyer as soon as possible, preferably one with specialized expertise. Read full letter Why you need a lawyer Frank H. Wu President Designate, Queens College, The City University of New York KNOW YOUR RIGHTS The FBI and other agencies have been questioning people across the country based on their First Amendment activity and on their race, ethnicity or national origin. Protect yourself by knowing your rights. Learn more Read Frank Wu's letter

Racial Profiling Racial profiling refers to the act of targeting individuals or groups based on their race or ethnicity for law enforcement scrutiny, investigation, or surveillance. Asian Americans have historically been subjected to racial profiling and discrimination, despite being a diverse group with various ethnic backgrounds, cultures, and histories. Court Hearing and A New Movement Emerges This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Lawsuit Against Florida Senate Bill 264 This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Texas House Bill 1075 and Senate Bill 552 This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Campaign to Oppose The Nomination of Casey Arrowood This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. More News Recent developments Issues of focus China Initiative Follow recent news on the China Initiative and its impacted individuals. Politicization of Research Grants Learn about the politicization of the coronavirus research grant funded by the National Institutes of Health. Stereotype An over-generalized belief about a particular category of people Implicit Bias Attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner Social Stigma Disapproval of, or discrimination against, a person based on perceivable social characteristics that serve to distinguish them from other members of a society Prejudice Harm or injury that results or may result from some action or judgment Discrimination The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things Racial Profiling The use of race, ethnicity or national origin as grounds for suspecting someone of having committed an offense Read more about Continuing Developments in racial profiling of Asian Americans here. Profiling of Asian Americans The Chinese Exclusion Act prohibited all immigration of Chinese laborers beginning in 1882. Subsequent amendments expanded the exclusion to all Asians. It was one of the most explicitly discriminatory laws based on race and national origin in U.S. history. The Chinese Exclusion Act and its amendments were not repealed until 1943. More on the Chinese Exclusion Act. During the Second World War, about 120,000 Japanese were interned under Executive Order 9066, about two thirds of them were native-born American citizens. Most of them were uprooted from their homes in the West Coast and sent to relocation centers for suspicion of disloyalty to the United States. In combination with these historical and stereotypical backgrounds, the current state of profiling of Chinese Americans is further entrenched by: Modern technology such as artifical intelligence and robotics is a major area of international competition for human talent. It also allows convenient collection of large amount of data and massive surveillance beyond the traditional boundaries, eroding civil liberties and privacy of all Americans and helping to target Asian Americans. Economic espionage and trade secrets became part of the expanded scope of national security after the 9/11 attacks. Athough no person of Chinese descent is known to have participated in acts of terrorism, Chinese Americans became subjects of surveillance and profiling as economic spies and insider threats. The rapid rise of China as an economic power in the past decades and its ambitious long-term development programs have become a threat to the U.S., both real and perceived. This threat is further promoted actively by the traditional military-industrial complex and the growing security-industrial complex. Engage China, or Confront it? The national security strategy issued in late 2017 officially declared China to be a competitive rival to the U.S. Implementation of the strategy has followed with intensified information campaigns and additional legislations and regulations that also enable the profiling practice, such as the "whole-of-society" approach advocated by FBI Director Christopher Wray and the Department of Justice China Initiative when anti-immigrant rhetoric are also rising. "Modern federal criminal laws have exploded in number and became impossibly broad and vague," according to criminal defense and civil liberties litigator Harvey Silverglate in his book titled "Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent." Without adequate transparency, oversight, and accountability, "prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any innocent individuals, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior." In total or in part, these factors have led innocent Asian Americans to recent persecutions as explicit targets, collateral damage, and scapegoats in the context of national security. Racial profiling is legally and morally wrong. 2. A Growing Pattern Government mistakes in espionage cases are rare. However, prior to Professor Xi's wrongful prosecution against Professor Xi, Sherry Chen, Guiqing Cao and Shuyi Li were also accused of spying for China in two separate cases. Their cases were all dropped within a two-year period. These innocent Chinese American scientists work in the academia, federal government, and private industry. Subsequent to 2015, there have been additional prosecutions of Chinese American scientists that collapsed, such as a former Michigan State University professor and two Tulane University professors. More details here . 3. Failure of Checks and Balances As the pattern of profiling against innocent Chinese American scientists began to emerge and pile up, many began to raise questions to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) whether race, ethnicity and national origin have played a role in their investigations and prosecutions. Those that spoke out include, but are not limited to: 42 members of the U.S. Congress The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Delaware U.S. Senators and Congressman Prominent scientists, engineers and professors Civil rights organizations Despite these and many other appeals being well-documented, the system of checks and balances failed to account for the public concerns. 4. Labels and Misinformation The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) deny that they target Asian Americans based on race, ethnicity or national origin. However, actions such as the use of code names and provocative messages by senior government officials tend to suggest otherwise. On February 13, 2018, FBI Director Christopher Wray testified in a Senate hearing that Chinese professors, scientists, students across basically every discipline are "nontraditional collectors" spying for China. According to a media report , FBI and intelligence agencies have urged universities to surveil Chinese students and scholars. The Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats declared in a July 2018 public forum: "Don't send your kids here!", "Don't put your people on our labs!", and "You cannot steal our secrets!" In its publicity campaign on "China: The Risk to Academia ," the FBI highlights the "annual cost to the U.S. economy of counterfeit goods, pirated software, and theft of trade secrets" as $225 - $600 Billion. As the American Physical Society pointed out , the “$225 - $600 Billion” figure "turns out to be primarily based on a generic GDP multiplier that would apply to any country at any time – it has no specific bearing on current circumstances with China or academia, as the title of the document unfortunately suggests." "Thousand Grains of Sand" by FBI official in 1999 "Fifth Column" during World War II "Communist Sympathizer" during the Red Scare Irresponsible code names have been used historically to stigmatize Asian Americans as "perpetual foreigners ," insinuating that they are not to be distrusted and their loyalty is always questioned, no matter how many generations they have lived in the U.S. Prior to FBI Director Wray coining the term "nontraditional collectors ," another FBI official advanced the "thousand grains of sand " and "mosaic " theories about Chinese in America when Dr. Wen Ho Lee was being persecuted about two decades ago. During World War II, Japanese persons in the West Coast were portrayed as the "fifth column ." Dr. Qian Xuesen and others were labeled "communist sympathizers " during the Red Scare in the 1950s. 5. Shifting Grounds and Double Standards In recent years, the FBI shifted its targets to those associated with China's talent recruitment programs, including the Thousand Talent Program. However, government recruitment program is nothing new. Japan has The World Premier International Center Initiative; the United Kingdom has the Earnest Rutherford Fund; Canada has the Canada 150 Research Chairs Program; Singapore has RIE2020; Israel has I-CORE; and France has the "Make Our Planet Great Again" Initiative. Freedom of movement is a fundamental human right. As long as the rules are followed, it is perfectly legitimate for academics to pursue opportuntities in the talent recruitment programs. In 2015, the former head of the Beijing office for the National Science Foundation (NSF) said that U.S. scientists can access world-class facilities, uniqiue geographic sites, and expertise in a growing number of fields by coolabroating with Chinese colleagues. In additon, as ties are built with Chinese funding agencies, NSF funding can be leveraged in coordinated partnerships on topics that are of interest to both countries. In 2014, the Director of the National Institute of Health (NIH) spoke at Fudan University in Shanghai and quoted Louis Pasteur, "Science knows no country because knowledge belongs to humanity," as the topic of his speech. Indeed, cancer knows no country. Coronavirus knows no country. According to the book titled "The Great Influenza," in the height of World War I and the influenze epidemic, a researcher found an effective way to fight the virus. Both the military officials and the leading scientists supported the decision to publish the research results, even if it would help the enemies, the Germans, on the battlefields. 6. "Researching While Chinese" Some say that some Chinese persons did do something wrong. However, it is not the right question to ask. For example, Sandra Bland , an African American woman, was stopped by a state trooper for signaling while making a traffic turn. Was it improper? It certainly was, but nobody should go to jail and died for it. The same can be said for Samuel DuBose for missing a front license plate. Or Philando Castile for a broken tail light. They all died for offenses they would not have had had they not been African Americans. Similarly, the right question we should ask is whether it is okay for the entire group of Chinese professors, scientists, and students being singled out for targeting as suspected non-traditional collectors for China, or Chinese spies. That is racial profiling. That is wrong. Proud to be a Chinese American Xiaoxing Xi I was jogging on the National Mall and along Pennsylvania Avenue this morning. As the sun came out behind the iconic landmarks, my heart welled up with pride of being a Chinese American. I ran by the Washington Monument. It is the ideal that “all men are created equal” the Founding Father fought for that has attracted me and many others to become an American citizen. I passed by the Lincoln Memorial. Abraham Lincoln gave his life to preserve the Union and abolish a system that treated people differently based on their races. Running past the Capitol Steps, my appreciation became so clear that in this country, people’s voice can be heard through a democratic process. I jogged in front of the FBI building. I commend the men and women who devote themselves to the protection of our country. In my case, however, they have used their might against an innocent citizen. What do these all mean to me? We need to get involved in the democratic process. If we see a bad policy, a bad practice, that hurt our country, we need to speak out and let our voice be heard. That we have the right to do so is what this country is so great about. As a proud citizen, I pledge to do my part. 7. Criminalizing Fundamental Research Threatens U.S. Leadership There is no evidence to support the government's crackdown of open scientific exchanges with China as they are mostly on basic research. The national policy governing federally-funded research has been National Security Decision Directive 189 (NSDD-189). Issued by President Ronald Reagan in 1985, it defines fundamental research as basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community. It states that it is the policy of this administration that, to the maximum extent possible, the products of fundamental research remain unrestricted. If national security requires control, then classify the research. Since the principle of freedom to publish and disseminate results is so fundamental to U.S. universities that many of them do not accept funding that restricts their faculty from publishing and disseminating research results. For example, the Princeton University policy says the University will not, as a matter of policy, accept any contracts or grants for the support of classified research. However, in its publicity campaign document, the FBI says, "Even if the technologies and their applications are not currently classified, they could be in the future." The "thousand grains of sand" and "mosaic" theories are widely held by the intelligence community - a collection of unclassified documents would create a classified document. According to these theories, while the Russians would steal the one classified document, the Chinese steals all the unclassified documents and put them together. So Chinese professors, scientists, and students are suspected of stealing secrets anyway, even when they are conducting fundamental research. On November 18, 2019, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations issued a staff report which makes a number of recommendations. Recommendation 11 says, "The administration should consider updating NSDD-189 and implement additional, limited restrictions on U.S. government funded fundamental research... Federal agencies must not only combat illegal transfers of controlled or classified research, but assess whether openly sharing some types of fundamental research is in the nation's interest." If the scientific community does not speak up, the day it can freely publish fundamental research and to openly discuss among colleagues may be numbered. This push for restrictions of open fundamental research reflects a total lack of understanding about what has made America the world leader in science and technology in the first place. In the book titled "Technology and National Security: Maintaining America's Edge," writer and historian Walter Isaacson wrote a chapter on The Source of America's Innovation Edge. He pointed out that the triangular partnership between government, industry, and academia created an ecosystem that helped produce the technological revolution after World War II. Each partner has its unique functions, and universities are where free and open research is conducted. If the free and open environment is lost and turned into national laboratories, American competitiveness in science and technology will be stifled. Former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John Deutch also wrote in the same book, "The risk of loss [of technology to China] is minor compared to the losses that will be incurred by restricting inquiry on university campuses." In other words, in the name of protecting America's research integrity, the policies that restrict open research on university campuses are in fact destroying America's leadership in science and technology. The Department of Justice denies that it makes decisions based on race, ethnicity or national origin. Harvard University Chemistry Department Chair Dr. Charles Lieber is cited as an example, but this is precisely what Professor Xi has been warning. Anyone who has academic collaboration with Chinese colleagues can become a target of the FBI. One does not have to be Chinese. According to a U.S. attorney, academic collaborations with China is "by definition conveying sensitive information to the Chinese." Once you are targeted, everything is under the microscope. National Security Decision Directive 189 (NSDD-189) "'Fundamental research' means basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons." It is the policy of this Administration that, to the maximum extent possible, the products of fundamental research remain unrestricted. It is also the product of this Administration that, where national security requires control, the mechanism for control of information generated during federally-funded fundamental research in science, technology and engineering at colleges, universities, and laboratories is classification. 8. Balance Between Open Science and Security On December 11, 2019, the National Science Foundation (NSF) released the JASON report on Fundamental Research Security. JASON is an independent group of elite scientists which advises the U.S. government on matters of science and technology. JASON was briefed by representatives of the intelligence community and law enforcement during the study. They had access to all the available classified information In the end, the JASON report says in its findings the scale and scope of the [foreign influence by the Chinese government] remain poorly defined. It recommends that NSF should support reaffirmation of the principles of NSDD-189, which make clear that fundamental research should remain unrestricted to the fullest extent possible. It also says failure to disclose commitments and actual potential conflicts of interest should be investigated and adjudicated by the relevant office of NSF and by universities as presumptive violations of research integrity, with consequences similar to those currently in place for scientific misconduct. Not by the FBI. Not by throwing them into jail. In Professor Xi opinion, the scientific community should rally around the JASON report. It is well balanced, and it provides a blueprint of the proper response for the U.S. government for the perceived threats of the Chinese government to fundamental research. 1. Wrongful Persecution Born in China, Professor Xi was among the first students to attend college after the Cultural Revolution in China. He received his Ph.D. degree in physics from Peking University and Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Science, in 1987. After several years of research at the Karlsruhe Nuclear Research Center, Germany, he came to the U.S. and worked for Bell Communication Research/Rutgers University and University of Maryland before joining the Physics faculty at Penn State University in 1995. He moved to Temple University in 2009. On May 19, 2015, he was informed that he would be appointed permanent Chair of the Physics Department. Two days later on May 21, 2015 when the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus was convening a press conference to express concerns about racial profiling in the case of Sherry Chen, Professor Xi was sensationally arrested in the wee hours of the morning. Media reports the following day quoted the Department of Justice that Professor Xi was a "Chinese spy" selling sensitive information to China. Four charges were subsequently made, all of them based on intercepted emails. Professor Xi and his lawyer refuted point-by-point that the allegations were totally false. In particular, five top experts, including one whose trade secrets were allegedly stolen, examined the emails and provided affidavits to support Professor Xi's defense that he did not share or sell proprietary information to China. In fact, the fundamental research results were readily available in the Internet. Professor Xi and his lawyer raised the question of how publicly available technology can be "stolen" and alleged to be a criminal act. On September 11, 2015, DOJ dropped all charges against Professor Xi without explanation or responding to his questions. However, irreparable damage to his finances, career, reputation and his family had already been made. Profiling Today Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov (1921-1989) was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1975 . As the father of the Soviet hydrogen bomb, Sakharov was awarded the Peace Prize for "his opposition to the abuse of power and his work for human rights." Since 2006, the American Physical Society (APS) has awarded the Andrei Sakharov Prize every second year to recipients for "outstanding leadership and/or achievements of scientists in upholding human rights." Professor Xiaoxing Xi (郗小星) of Temple University is a 2020 recipient of the Andrei Sakharov Prize. He is himself a victim of racial profiling . Since the wrongful prosecution against him was dropped in 2015, Professor Xi has been tirelessly speaking up across the nation to stop the injustice of racial profiling, defend openness in university campuses, and protect American competitiveness in science and technology. Professor Xi was scheduled to receive the Andrei Sakharov Prize on March 4, 2020. The event was cancelled due to concerns about the coronavirus. Professor Xi recorded his prepared presentation in a 32-minute video. It provides compelling facts and arguments that cover not only the wrongful prosecution against him, but also the government's abuse of authority at the expense of American competitiveness and leadership by criminalizing fundamental research. This page is dedicated to communicate and expand on Professor Xi's message on racial profiling, which has already infected academia, government, private industry, and other segments of American society. It provides a synopsis of profiling today.

Go Go Prev Next The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is the principal federal law enforcement agency of the United States, operating under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice (DOJ). Established in 1908, the mission of the FBI is to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution of the United States, including safeguarding the rights and liberties of all citizens. The FBI operates several branches including Intelligence, National Security, Criminal and Cyber, Science and Technology, and Information and Technology. With its headquarters in Washington, D.C., and 56 field offices across the nation, the FBI’s Fiscal Year 2023 budget was $11.3 billion with 37,000 authorized positions, 260 attorneys, and 13,600 agents. The FBI’s role and activities related to the China Initiative may arguably be traced to Director Christopher Wray’s testimony in a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on February 13, 2018, in which he targeted all students, scholars and scientists of Chinese origin as “non-traditional collectors” and a national security threat to the United States. Alarmed by the racial and ethnic profiling overtone, a coalition of organizations led by the Committee of 100 (C100) wrote to Director Wray on March 1, 2018, and requested a meeting to “engage in positive dialogue to advance our nation’s ideals as well as its national security.” On August 8, 2018, the FBI warned over 100 top leaders of Texas academic and medical institutions from the Texas Medical Center and across Texas about security threats from foreign adversaries as the first step in a new initiative the bureau planned to replicate around the country. In response to the reported FBI initiative, the Asian American community organized two educational events in Houston and at the United Chinese Americans National Convention in Washington, DC. Special agents from the FBI Houston and New York Field Offices participated in these events in September 2018, less than two months prior to DOJ’s launch of the China Initiative. A month after the launch of the China Initiative, a group of community leaders met with a senior-level FBI official and representatives at the FBI Headquarters to convey concerns raised within the Chinese American community about the role of bias in its investigations, among other issues. An attempt to establish a dialogue was largely unsuccessful as the discussions devolved into two separate monologues. Tensions between the U.S. and China intensified in July 2020 when the U.S. abruptly ordered China to close its consulate in Houston within 72 hours, accusing diplomats of aiding economic espionage and the attempted theft of scientific research, but gave few details to support the allegation. At the same time, DOJ filed charges against five scientists from China in five separate cases under the “China Initiative," alleging them to be part of China’s military. The FBI interviewed visa holders in more than 25 U.S. cities suspected of hiding their Chinese military memberships. A year later, all five visa fraud cases were dismissed. In Houston, FBI agents began to knock on doors to demand interviews with persons of Chinese descent, creating fear and anguish. The Chinese American community in Houston were deeply concerned about a witch hunt for spies by the FBI to use Chinese Americans as scapegoats to justify the political claim. A “Know Your Rights” webinar was organized to address the urgent question, "What to do if you are questioned by the FBI or police?" It was attended by over 830 participants. All the attorneys advised the community not to speak to the FBI as "nothing good will come out of it." Three months after the announced end of the China Initiative in February 2022, the FBI San Francisco Field Office hosted an Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) town hall meeting in downtown Oakland. Acknowledging the community’s concerns surrounding FBI national security investigations related to the People’s Republic of China, the purpose of the town hall meeting was to engage in an open and honest discussion about the FBI program, better understand the AANHPI community’s concerns, and exchange ideas on ways we can collectively work to address those concerns. The successful conclusion of the town hall meeting led to additional plans and activities at the local and national levels. The FBI San Francisco Field Office spoke at a roundtable in the 2023 C100 Annual Conference in San Jose, California. A C100 delegation visited Washington, DC, on September 28-29, 2023, including a 90-minute meeting with Jill Murphy, Deputy Assistant Director (DAD) of the Counterintelligence Division, and other FBI personnel at the FBI Headquarters. Jill Murphy was a featured speaker in a panel at the 2024 C100 Annual Conference in New York City. She spoke about some of the unintended negative consequences of U.S. national defense policies particularly those that have adversely affected the U.S. scientific and Chinese American communities. On June 6, 2024, Rice University’s Baker Center and Office of Innovation, Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition, and APA Justice co-hosted an unprecedented forum on “A Dialogue Between the Academic and Asian American Communities and the FBI.” The event was held in person at Rice University and also live streamed nationwide. While there is still significant progress that needs to be made to ensure that the U.S. is a welcoming environment that can attract and retain the best and brightest talents, the FBI acknowledged the negative impact that the China Initiative had made and is seeking to rebuild trust and continue a dialogue with the communities. “We’ve talked today about the implementation steps, the progress we can make. (This) could prove to be one of the most important events that ever occurred on campus, so I’m very appreciative for being a part of it,” said Neal Lane, senior fellow in science and technology policy at the Baker Institute and former director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. References and Links 2024 Department of Justice: FY2024 Federal Bureau of Investigation Budget Performance Summary Section II 2020/12/22 Department of Justice: Organization Chart of Federal Bureau of Investigation 2018/03/01 Committee of 100: Community Organizations Call for Meeting with FBI Director Christopher Wray Regarding Profiling of Students, Scholars, and Scientists with Chinese Origins 2018/02/13 U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: Hearing on Global Threats and National Security Overview Add paragraph text. Click “Edit Text” to customize this theme across your site. You can update and reuse text themes. Timeline Contents Select Title FBI & Law Enforcement WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME

The "China Initiative" A US government national-security program, created to address economic espionage, disproportionately targeted Asian Americans and academic communities for administrative errors and harmed academic freedom and open science. THE NUMBERS Known Cases 77 Known Impacted Individuals 162 Days Lasted 1,210 Explore the China Initiative What is it? Timeline of Events Impacted Persons Webinars What is the "China Initiative"? The "China Initiative" refers to a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) effort that was launched under the Trump Administration in November 2018. Its original aim was to combat economic espionage and theft of intellectual property that the U.S. government believed was being conducted by Chinese entities, including individuals and organizations with ties to the Chinese government. However, the “China Initiative” resulted in four major concerns: 1. Racial Profiling: The initiative led to racial profiling and the unfair targeting of Asian Americans. Individuals of Asian descent, including Chinese Americans, faced increased scrutiny or suspicion based on their ethnicity rather than any evidence of wrongdoing. 2. Stigmatization: The initiative perpetuated stereotypes and stigmatization of Asian Americans, making them feel like they are under suspicion or not fully trusted solely because of their heritage. 3. Impact on Scientific Collaboration: The initiative created a chilling effect on scientific collaboration between U.S. and Chinese researchers, hindering legitimate collaborative efforts and harming US leadership in science and technology. 4. Government Overreach. The initiative was overly broad, allowed abuse and misuse of authority by some law enforcement agents, and caused severe damage to the career, finance, and reputation of innocent individuals and their families. The “China Initiative” ended officially in February 2022 under the Biden Administration, but the harms it inflicted on targeted individuals and the broader AAPI community remain. Timeline of Major Events Nov 1, 2018 U.S. Attorney General Jeff Session launched the China Initiative to combat national security threats and economic espionage emanating from the People’s Republic of China. Without a definition of what constitutes a China Initiative case, it drifted to profile and stigmatize Asian Americans and individuals of Asian descent, creating severe damage and a chilling effect on scientific collaboration and harming U.S. leadership in science and technology. 1. DOJ launched China Initiative Read more Dec 7, 2018 A month after the launch of the China Initiative, a group of community leaders met with a senior FBI official and representatives at the FBI headquarters in Washington DC to convey concerns raised within the Chinese American community about the role of bias in its investigations, among other issues, in a futile attempt to establish a continuing dialogue to address the concerns. 2. Attempted Dialogue with FBI Failed Read more Apr 19, 2019 Headlined by “How Not to Cure Cancer – The U.S. is purging Chinese scientists in a New Red Scare,” investigative reports emerged on FBI and NIH nationwide activities targeting individuals of Asian descent, especially biomedical researchers in the Houston area. 3. Media Reports on Purge by NIH and FBI Read more Aug 21, 2019 Kansas University Professor Feng “Franklin” Tao became the first academic and scientist of Chinese origin to be indicted in August 2019. He was followed by Professors Anming Hu and Gang Chen, Researcher Dr. Qing Wang, New York Police Department Officer Baimadajie Angwang, a group of five STEM researchers and students from China, and others. The year 2020 saw the injustice inflicted by the government shifting and intensifying its profiling of scientists, most of them of Chinese origin, for “research integrity” in the name of national security. 4. Shift to Profiling Scientists of Chinese Origin Read more Feb 27, 2020 From generation to generation, the Asian Pacific American communities have been resilient in fighting against discrimination and protecting their civil rights. It is a continuing effort that transcends the China Initiative, which again confirms the commitment and determination of the communities from elected officials to organizations and individuals. 5. Communities Respond with Resilience Read more Jan 5, 2021 On January 5, 2021, a coalition of organizations and individuals wrote to President-elect Joe Biden, requesting him to end the China Initiative and take steps to combat racial profiling. Two weeks later, the indictment of MIT Professor Gang Chen ignited the “We Are All Gang Chen” movement. Between September 2020 and June 2021, five organizations partnered to produce a series of five educational webinars to raise nationwide awareness about the China Initiative. 6. Letter to President-Elect Biden to End China Initiative Read more Jun 30, 2021 Following a public campaign led by Maryland State Senator Susan Lee and a coalition in February 2022, Reps. Jamie Raskin and Judy Chu hosted a Democratic Member Roundtable on “Researching while Chinese American: Ethnic Profiling, Chinese American Scientists and a New American Brain Drain” in June 2022. It was the first congressional hearing where the profiling of Chinese American scientists and the damage to American leadership in science and technology were heard. 7. Congressional Roundtable on Racial Profiling Read more Jul 22, 2021 The abrupt dismissal of visa fraud and other charges against five scientists from China in five separate “China Initiative” cases and the FBI reports from the discovery process exposed the weaknesses of the prosecutions, dissension in the FBI’s own ranks, and exaggerated claims of national security risks by the government. 8. Five Visa Fraud Cases Dismissed Read more Sep 8, 2021 A group of 177 Stanford University faculty members sent an open letter to US Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, requesting that he terminate the China Initiative. The campaign became national and continued until the end of the China Initiative. More than 3,100 faculty, researchers, and scientists representing over 230 institutions from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico co-signed the letters. 9. Stanford Faculty Starts Nationwide Campaign to End China Initiative Read more Sep 15, 2021 Multiple media reports the China Initiative as unraveling and out of control after cases that were sensationally publicized early on by the government began to be dismissed or acquitted in courts rapidly in a span of several months. 10. The China Initiative Unraveling and Out of Control Read more Dec 2, 2021 On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published two investigative reports on the China Initiative as newly appointed Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen was conducting a review of the initiative. 11. MIT Technology Review Investigative Reports Read more Feb 23, 2022 Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen announced the end of the China Initiative. The 1,210 days of the Initiative were extremely damaging to individuals and their families, as well as the Asian American and scientific communities. The end of the China Initiative is a welcomed start to correct the harms it caused. APA Justice is committed to continue its work to address racial profiling and seek justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American communities. 12. China Initiative Ends Read more BACKGROUND A pattern of racial profiling against Chinese American scientists began to emerge in 2015. In a relatively short time span, four naturalized American citizens in three separate situations were indicted for one of most serious crimes related to espionage and trade secrets that carried heavy penalties in prison terms and fines. These individuals worked in diverse fields - private industry, federal government, and academia respectively. All three cases were subsequently dismissed or dropped without apology or further explanation. This is highly unusual because the Department of Justice (DOJ) prides itself on its mission of prosecuting criminal cases. Conviction rate is a key measure of success and performance. Annual statistical reports show that the overall DOJ conviction rate in all criminal prosecutions has been over 90% every year since 2001. The rate for espionage-related charges is expected to be much higher than average due to its serious nature and impact on the accused. A combination of human mistakes, implicit bias, social stigmatism, explicit prejudice, and racial profiling may explain why some of these innocent individuals were wrongly prosecuted in the first place. However, the damages done to them and their families are undeniably devastating. The legal cost to defend oneself is high, easily run into hundreds of thousands of dollars and higher. Reputations and careers built on many years of accomplishments would be forever lost or stalled in an instant, deeming them to become unemployed and unemployable. The emotional shock and fear leave traumatic scars on the individuals and family members for the rest of their lives. In effect, an innocent person, once wrongly accused, can seldom be made whole again. There are other individual victims whose cases were also dismissed or found not guilty. Some agreed to much lesser infractions than the original charges to avoid financial ruins. Our nation loses their talents and contributions to the society when they are forced to leave the country. These cases are almost never reported by the government. This website dedicates one webpage each for impacted individuals, many of them are heroically speaking out and fighting back for justice and fairness. Sherry Chen and Professor Xiaoxing Xi are the raison d'être for APA Justice. If you know of similar cases, please contact us at contact@apajustice.org . Jumpstart your knowledge on The China Initiative A 7-minute video aimed to educate the general public on increasing discrimination faced by Chinese scientists under the Department of Justice's China Initiative and to highlight the many scientific accomplishments they have contributed to U.S. institutions of higher education and research. Watch Interview of Dr. David Ho, Columbia University’s Clyde and Helen Wu Professor of Medicine; Michael A. Szonyi, Director of the Harvard University Fairbank Center; Catherine X. Pan, head of Dorsey & Whitney’s U.S.-China practice; and Frank Wu, President of Queens College and a Serica Initiative board member, among others. Watch Impacted Persons According to the Department of Justice and two investigative reports by the MIT Technology Review, the “China Initiative” had 77 known cases involving 162 individuals (one of them an entity). Twenty three (23) cases are identified as “Research Integrity” involving academics, researchers, and scientists. Academic Cases Other/Non-China Initiative Cases Read More Item One Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Two Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Three Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Chili Onions Pepperoni Mushrooms Olives Cheese Sort by Read More Item One Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Two Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Three Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Chili Onions Pepperoni Mushrooms Olives Cheese Sort by On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published The US crackdown on Chinese economic espionage is a mess. We have the data to show it . According to the report, the US government’s China Initiative sought to protect national security. In the most comprehensive analysis of cases to date, MIT Technology Review reveals how far it has strayed from its goals. Among its major findings are: The DOJ has neither officially defined the China Initiative nor explained what leads it to label a case as part of the initiative The initiative’s focus increasingly has moved away from economic espionage and hacking cases to “research integrity” issues, such as failures to fully disclose foreign affiliations on forms A significant number of research integrity cases have been dropped or dismissed Only about a quarter of people and institutions charged under the China Initiative have been convicted Many cases have little or no obvious connection to national security or the theft of trade secrets Nearly 90% of the defendants charged under the initiative are of Chinese heritage Although new activity appears to have slowed since Donald Trump lost the 2020 US presidential election, prosecutions and new cases continue under the Biden administration The Department of Justice does not list all cases believed to be part of the China Initiative on its webpage and has deleted others linked to the project. Two days after MIT Technology Review requested comment from the DOJ regarding the initiative, the department made significant changes to its own list of cases, adding some and deleting 39 defendants previously connected to the China Initiative from its website. This included several instances where the government had announced prosecutions with great fanfare, only for the cases to fail —including one that was dismissed by a judge after a mistrial. The MIT Technology Review database of 77 "China Initiative" cases is posted online and can be used for interactive analysis. It draws primarily on the press releases that have been added to the DOJ’s China Initiative webpage over the last three years, including those recently removed from its public pages. The MIT Technology Review supplemented this information with court records and interviews with defense attorneys, defendants’ family members, collaborating researchers, former US prosecutors, civil rights advocates, lawmakers, and outside scholars who have studied the initiative. APA Justice provided assistance to verify and validate the 77 "China Initiative" cases before the removal of some cases by DOJ. MIT Technology Review provides a second full report titled We built a database to understand the China Initiative. Then the government changed its records on how the database was built, what DOJ changed in its online report, and how the database is organized, including a statement on transparency and conflict-of-interest. 11/01/2018 - 02/23/2022 1,210 DAYS Endorsers of Stanford Letter Stanford University: 177 University of California Berkeley: 214 Temple University: 167 Princeton University: 198 University of Michigan: 430 Southern Illinois University Faculty Senate: 53 Yale University: 192 University of California Irvine: 92 University of Pennsylvania: 168 Baylor College of Medicine: 219 APA Justice nationwide campaign: 1,209 Total: 3,119 Number of institutions APA Justice nationwide campaign: 231 + Stanford University + University of California Berkeley + Temple University + Princeton University + University of Michigan + Southern Illinois University + Yale University + University of California Irvine + University of Pennsylvania + Baylor College of Medicine Number of states + territories States: 50 + District of Columbia + Puerto Rico Change.org supporters: 244 See University Responses to the China Initiative. On February 23, 2022, the Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Department of Justice (DOJ), Matthew G. Olsen, announced the end of the “China Initiative,” a program that was meant to address economic espionage but morphed into disproportionately targeting Asian Americans and academic communities for administrative errors and harming academic freedom and open science. While we disagree with Mr. Olsen’s self-assessment that the DOJ did not find racial bias in “China Initiative” cases, we welcome the end of the ill-conceived initiative and DOJ’s openness to listen and respond to community concerns. CHINA INITIATIVE ENDS On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published The US crackdown on Chinese economic espionage is a mess. We have the data to show it . Read full report China Initiative Analysis MIT Technology Review Cases charged under the China Initiative by year Impacted Persons According to the Department of Justice and two investigative reports by the MIT Technology Review, the “China Initiative” had 77 known cases involving 162 individuals (one of them an entity). Twenty three (23) cases are identified as “Research Integrity” involving academics, researchers, and scientists. Find detailed information on Impacted Persons on this page .

Newsletter - #317 Dr. Bryant Lin; Rep. Sylvester Turner; NIH Cuts Blocked Amidst Fear; DOGE Errors; + #317 Dr. Bryant Lin; Rep. Sylvester Turner; NIH Cuts Blocked Amidst Fear; DOGE Errors; + In This Issue #317 · NYT : Dr. Bryant Lin Got Cancer; He Didn't Quit · Remembering Congressman Sylvester Turner · Trump's Cuts to NIH Blocked Amidst Fear and Uncertainty · DOGE Errors and Questions of Transparency · News and Activities for the Communities NYT : Dr. Bryant Lin Got Cancer; He Didn't Quit According to New York Times on February 26, 2025, Dr. Bryant Lin 林百里 , a Stanford University professor and physician, was given a terminal Stage 4 lung cancer at age 50. A nonsmoker, he had spent much of his career researching lung cancer in Asian populations—only to find himself facing the very disease he had studied. Instead of withdrawing, he chose to teach a deeply personal course, “From Diagnosis to Dialogue: A Doctor’s Real-Time Battle With Cancer,” in which he shared his journey as both a doctor and a patient.The course filled immediately, with students even sitting on the floor to attend. Dr. Lin was moved by their enthusiasm, telling them, “It’s quite an honor for me, honestly. The fact that you would want to sign up for my class.”Throughout the 10-week course, he remained upbeat, guiding students through discussions on the psychology of illness, difficult medical conversations, and the role of spirituality in coping with disease. His wife, Christine Chan , spoke in a session on caregiving, describing her challenges and their family’s adjustments. Despite the severity of his condition, Dr. Lin’s humor shone through—when discussing new treatment options, he quipped, “Asking for a friend!”In one lecture, Dr. Lin shared a letter from a dying patient who had chosen to end dialysis, expressing gratitude for his care, “You treated me as you would treat your own father.”Dr. Lin explained that this moment stayed with him and inspired him to give back through his class. His goal was to help students see the humanity in medicine and, perhaps, inspire some to work in cancer care. By the final lecture, when he asked how many were considering that path, about a third raised their hands.His closing remarks echoed Lou Gehrig ’s famous farewell, “Yet today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of this earth.” He expressed gratitude for his students, family, and colleagues, stating, “I may have had a tough break, but I have an awful lot to live for.”The class had an impact beyond medical training. Some students encouraged their families to get screened for lung cancer. One freshman, Gideon Witchel , took the course to better understand his mother’s past battle with breast cancer. Inspired by Dr. Lin, he finally talked to her about her illness, reading through letters she had written during treatment.Dr. Lin referred to his course as his “letter” to students, sharing his lessons while he still had time. Privately, he had written a personal letter for his sons to read after he was gone: “Whether I’m here or not, what I want you to know is that I love you. Of the many things I’ve done that have given my life meaning, being your daddy is the greatest of all.”His story became one of resilience, education, and love—an unfinished puzzle that others would continue piecing together.Read the New York Times article: https://bit.ly/43sYFZU Remembering Congressman Sylvester Turner According to multiple media reports, Congressman Sylvester Turner passed away suddenly on March 4, 2025. He was 70.Rep. Turner was elected to represent Texas' 18th Congressional District in the November 2024 election. The district includes much of inner-city Houston and the surrounding areas. Before him, the seat was held by late-Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee . Rep. Jackson Lee represented the district from 1995 until July 2024, when she died of pancreatic cancer. Prior to joining Congress this year, Rep. Turner was mayor of Houston and a member of the Texas House of Representatives.Both Reps. Turner and Jackson Lee participated actively in the opposition of the Texas alien land bill SB147 in 2023, taking to the streets and marching with the Asian American communities. According to Houston Public Media on January 23, 2023, then-Houston-Mayor Turner said, "Senate Bill 147 is just down right wrong. It is more divisive than anything else. Houston, the most diverse city in the United States, stands as one to say that we all should stand against 147." Trump's Cuts to NIH Blocked Amidst Fear and Uncertainty As of March 6, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trump 's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 104.According to AP News , New York Times , STAT , and multiple media reports, U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from slashing National Institutes of Health (NIH) payments for research indirect cost, a decision that suggests plaintiffs seeking to overturn the sweeping policy change are likely to eventually succeed. “Absent a nationwide injunction, institutions across the country will be forced to operate with the same uncertainty, resulting in the types of irreparable harm that a preliminary injunction is meant to prevent,” she wrote.Judge Kelley made the ruling in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. National Institutes of Health (1:25-cv-10338) which was filed in the U.S. Court for the District of Massachusetts. The case combined three lawsuits brought by coalitions of Democratic states, universities, and medical associations. Dr. David J. Skorton of the Association of American Medical Colleges, one of the plaintiffs, applauded the ruling. “These unlawful cuts would slow medical progress and cost lives,” he wrote in a statement, saying the NIH-funded research “benefits every person and community in America.”According to the Washington Post on March 6, 2025, the Trump administration’s orders have created more turmoil and damage at the NIH than was previously known. On January 24, 2025, the Trump administration installed Matthew Memoli , a longtime NIH influenza researcher and physician who was not part of the senior leadership ranks, as acting director, bypassing Lawrence Tabak , principal deputy director of NIH who served as acting director for two years under the Biden administration. That initial shock marked the beginning of six weeks of turmoil for NIH's scientific staff. In just that short period, the Trump administration reshaped NIH's leadership, stalled its core mission of identifying cutting-edge research to fund, and effectively silenced personnel at the world's largest biomedical research sponsor—a $48 billion operation supporting roughly 300,000 external scientists. The Washington Post provides a detailed week-by-week summary of the events.Even in a climate of fear, NIH employees say they want to protect their institution. They worry this winter of disruption may be causing lasting damage to the way science is conducted in the United States. “The whole thing could just disappear,” said Phil Murphy , senior investigator and chief of the laboratory of molecular immunology at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). “The biomedical research enterprise in the United States depends largely on NIH dollars. You take the dollars away, the labs go away, and you lose the next generation of scientists.” Latest Developments with Federal Employees According to AP News on March 5, 2025, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says about 180 employees who were laid off two weeks ago can come back to work. An email was reportedly sent with the subject line, “Read this e-mail immediately.” It said that “after further review and consideration,” a February 15 termination notice has been rescinded and the employee was cleared to return to work on Wednesday. “You should return to duty under your previous work schedule,” it said. “We apologize for any disruption that this may have caused.”According to NPR on March 5, 2025, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to temporarily reinstate close to 6,000 employees fired since February 13, finding reasonable grounds to believe the agency acted illegally in terminating them. MSPB issued a stay , ordering the USDA to return the fired workers to their jobs for 45 days while an investigation continues. The MSPB acts as an internal court to consider federal employees' complaints against the government. According to MSPB , the weekly number of cases it receives has spiked since February, reaching 2,178 in the most recent week. According to Federal News Network on March 4, 2025, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has just rehired about half of the employees it fired two weeks ago. The reversal comes after a federal judge ruled in American Federation Of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. United States Office of Personnel Management (3:25-cv-01780) that the Trump administration's directives telling agencies to fire their probationary employees were illegal. The reinstated workers will receive backpay and will not see a break in service. While 84 employees will be going back to work, the other 86 fired workers will still be out of their jobs. NSF said that is because they were intermittent employees and not full-time staff members. DOGE Errors and Its Lack of Transparency According to New York Times on March 3, 2025, for the second time in a week, Elon Musk’s "Department Government Efficiency" updated its “wall of receipts” to remove mistakes that inflated its success, erasing over $4 billion in claimed savings. It deleted or altered more than 1,000 contracts—40% of last week's listings. Total reported savings has dropped from $16 billion to under $9 billion since February 19.Experts have flagged numerous errors, including miscalculations, duplicate entries, and contracts that ended long ago. According to Inside Higher Ed on March 5, 2025, education scholars say the administration’s rash of cuts and lack of quality transparency will have a “devastating effect” on public policy and student outcomes for years to come.On February 18, 2025, President Trump ordered federal agencies to disclose all terminated programs, contracts, and grants to enhance transparency. However, the Department of Education has not provided details on cuts totaling $1.9 billion, despite requests. Critics argue the administration is failing to be truly transparent, with experts warning that these cuts will significantly impact research, policymaking, and education outcomes.“The cuts that happened recently are going to have far-reaching impacts, and those impacts could really be long term unless some rapid action is taken,” said Mamie Voight , president of the Institute for Higher Education Policy. “To eliminate data, evidence and research is working in opposition to efficiency,” she said.In a recent analysis, titled “ Running Down DOGE’s Department of Education Receipts ,” Nat Malkus , deputy director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, compared a leaked list of the 89 terminated Institute of Education Sciences contracts, along with detailed data from USASpending.gov * , to those DOGE had posted on its website. He said he found major inconsistencies in how savings were calculated. Antoinette Flores , director of higher education accountability and quality at New America, conducted similar research and also found that the DOGE data does not add up and exaggerates the savings. “It’s absolutely hypocrisy,” she said. “It feels like we’re all being gaslit. I don’t know why they are saying they want to be transparent without being transparent.” * What is USASpending.gov ? USASpending.gov is the official U.S. government website that tracks federal spending. It provides public access to data on how taxpayer dollars are allocated, including details on federal contracts, grants, loans, and other financial assistance. The site is managed by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and aims to enhance transparency by allowing users to search and analyze government expenditures across agencies, recipients, and specific programs.USASpending.gov was created as part of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) of 2006, which was signed into law by President George W. Bush on September 26, 2006. The website was launched in 2007. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/03/12 MSU Webinar on China Initiative2025/03/16 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/03/26 Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within2025/03/30 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/04/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/24-26 Committee of 100 Annual Conference and Gala2025/04/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/05/05 APA Justice Monthly MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. 03/12 MSU Webinar: The China Initiative On March 12, 2025, please join the webinar hosted by Michigan State University's Asian Pacific American Studies Program for an insightful discussion of the past and present of the China Initiative, a Trump administration program that targeted Asian American scholars and researchers for investigation and prosecution. Dr. Lok Siu of UC Berkeley and Dr. Jeremy Wu of APA Justice will speak at the event moderated by Dr. Kent Weber of Michigan State University.Register to attend: https://bit.ly/4hVaITO 3. USCET 2025 Summer Internship Opens The U.S.-China Education Trust (USCET) is accepting applications from undergraduate juniors, seniors, and graduate students passionate about U.S.-China relations. This hybrid, part-time internship at a nonprofit dedicated to cross-cultural dialogue offers hands-on experience and the opportunity to earn a stipend or academic credit. Read the job description and follow application steps here: https://bit.ly/3Nz4Tyi . Application Deadline: March 28, 2025, at 11:59 PM ET. 4. Erratum In APA Justice Newsletter Issue #316 , Jeremy Berg was incorrectly identified as a former director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). He previously served as the director of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, a division of NIH. We regret the error. Back View PDF March 7, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #129 Biden Signs Bill to Create Museum; Norm Goes Home to San Jose; Catch Up with the News #129 Biden Signs Bill to Create Museum; Norm Goes Home to San Jose; Catch Up with the News Back View PDF June 14, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #195: 6/5 Meeting; Voting Assistance; Stand With Asian Americans; Houston Safety #195: 6/5 Meeting; Voting Assistance; Stand With Asian Americans; Houston Safety In This Issue #195 2023/06/05 Monthly Meeting Summary Posted Asian Americans Feel Particularly Targeted By New Laws Criminalizing Those Who Assist Voters No Longer Suffering In Silence: Asian Americans Denied Tech Leadership Roles Go To Court Houston Town Hall Meetings on Asiatown Community Safety 2023/06/05 Monthly Meeting Summary Posted The June 5, 2023, APA Justice monthly meeting summary has been posted at https://bit.ly/42N0htX . We thank the following speakers for their updates and discussions: Casey Lee , Policy Advisor, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), provided updates on the Preemption of Real Property Discrimination Act introduced by Reps. Al Green and Judy Chu and uplifted a primer on the alien land law issue that was published by Edgar Chen , Special Policy Advisor, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association. Joanna Derman , Director of the Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights and National Security Program, gave updates on three Advancing Justice | AAJC activities: (a) messaging guidance and suggested talking points on how to frame conversations and policy work related to US-China strategic competition, (b) tracking all discriminatory land laws being introduced across the country, and (c) bill analysis guide on US-China legislation and determine its potential for immediate harm. Mary Tablante , Associate Director of Strategic Communications, Asian American Scholar Forum, gave updates on three activities: (a) a video series titled “Project Pioneer” with the National Science Foundation on contributions of Asian American and immigrant pioneers to the US and the world, (b) meetings with the Biden Administration to educate and give voice to issues of concern from the scholar community, and (c) convening an event in partnership with the Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies on presidential appointments in the Federal Government. Elizabeth Goitein , Senior Director, Liberty & National Security Program, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, gave a briefing on the history, problems, and ongoing legislative battle over the reauthorization of section 702 of FISA. Section 702 authorizes warrantless surveillance. It is supposed to target only foreigners overseas, but for the last 15 years it has become a rich source of warrantless access to American’s communications - their emails, their phone calls, their text messages - in a way that completely undermines Congress's intent and Americans’ constitutional rights. Asian Americans and Chinese Americans in particular are extremely likely to be victims of these types of abuses. The Brennan Center's position is that Congress should not reauthorize Section 702 without significant, sweeping reforms. In the case of Professor Xiaoxing Xi 郗小星 , a physics professor at Temple University, he was prosecuted based on false charges that he had shared secret information about superconductor technology. Those charges were the result of the Government's misreading of emails that the Government had intercepted. The Government ultimately had to drop the charges, but only after significant damage to Dr. Xi and his family. Dr. Xi has filed suit against the Government. In that suit, he alleges that the Government accesses emails using Section 702. Clay Zhu 朱可亮 , Partner, DeHeng Law Offices 德恒律师事务所; Founder, Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA) 华美维权同盟, gave an update on the lawsuit led by the legal team of CALDA, ACLU, AALDELF, and a law firm against the discriminatory Florida Senate Bill 264 which was signed by Governor Ron DeSantis into law on May 22. The legal team was working on a motion for preliminary injunction. The legal team has received tremendous support from organizations and communities. It shows our communities have realized that this is something we need to take a stand. Clay has also received tremendous support from sister and partner organizations and is monitoring the situations in other states. There is a lot of community efforts happening in Texas and Florida by Professor Steven Pei 白先慎 and many other people and Texas-based organizations lobbying the legislature and voicing our opposition to the bills. Ashley Gorski , Senior Staff Attorney, National Security Project, ACLU, commented that it is essential that we do all that we can to stop this Florida bill in its tracks to prevent copycat litigation from going forward and to work alongside so many community organizations that have been doing the hard work of advocating directly with the legislatures to try to stop these bills from going into effect. Ashley underscores that this law is stigmatizing and discriminatory just by virtue of it being in the books. People's lives are very concretely affected by this law going into effect. They risk losing deposits on the property that they have already contracted. If this law goes into effect, they are going to lose out on the opportunity to purchase that property. A real estate brokerage firm has already seen a decline in prospective clients and expects to lose a significant percentage of its business because of this law. Bethany Li , Legal Director, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), commented that the work that we are doing here on this case is very much in line with the China initiatives that we have done in the past, such as with the South Asian and Muslim community after 9/11. Asian American communities have been targeted for being national security threats and harmed. Throughout the call today, we are hearing not just the alien land law passed in Florida and the ones that we continue to monitor, but also a lot of the surveillance issues that have affected Asian American communities across the board as well as communities of color. One of the ways in which we try to approach our work against violence in Asian American communities is to pay closer attention to how the United States and different states enact laws and policies at different levels contribute to that violence, despite their rhetoric about wanting to protect and support Asian American communities from violence. Haipei Shue 薛海培 , President, United Chinese Americans, reported from Florida where he convened a two-day statewide retreat with the Chinese American community leaders to summarize what they have learned and how to move forward on community matters. With the sudden appearance of the alien land bill, the participants not only saw the bill firsthand, but many were also actively involved in fighting it. About 60 people from six major cities in Florida attended the retreat in Orlando. A new 501(c)(4) organization was born out of this protest movement. The name is Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA). At the same time, Chinese American communities in Louisiana and Alabama are still fighting against the bills that impact their lives in their states. The alien land bills impact the Chinese community countrywide. UCA will have similar retreats in other states that have been affected by such laws and prepare for next year, a presidential election year. Participants from California, Georgia, North and South Carolina to Florida. have joined weekly meetings started by Texas state representative Gene Wu every Sunday evening since February. Gene Wu 吳元之 , Member, Texas House of Representatives, saw how angry the community has become because of the importance of the alien land bills, massive organizational efforts, and some real key leaders stepping up to fill the gap. That was how the Texas bills were defeated. The real key was the community’s participation. It is very clear in other states like Louisiana and Florida, they did not have a strong Asian presence in the legislative body. Gene was glad to see in many other states, African American legislators just stood up and took the lead in defending against some of these bills. We need more national leadership on this issue because this issue is not going away. This is an existential crisis for the Asian community and especially for the Chinese community. We have periods and waves of anti-Chinese, anti-Asian sentiment in our nation's history, but this is one of the strongest pushes against our community that Gene has ever seen. Either we stand up and fight, or it is game over. The laws are just the tip of the wave, the crest of the coming wave is anti-Asian hate. There is a perfect storm of Covid, of tensions with China, and economic factors that are going to create the right environment for dramatically increased anti-Asian hate. It should be incumbent upon all Asian communities to start a campaign nationally that this is wrong. It is racist to hold Asian Americans responsible for what happens in other parts of the world when you don't do that to anybody else. We need to engage our media celebrities. We need to engage elected officials. We need to engage the President. We need to engage a lot of other groups to push back against this. A part of this is also fighting these bills at the national level. Read the 6/5 meeting summary: https://bit.ly/46GI6ZO . Watch the 6/5 meeting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBYYQipLmis (1:36:15). Read past monthly meeting summaries: https://bit.ly/3kxkqxP Asian Americans Feel Particularly Targeted By New Laws Criminalizing Those Who Assist Voters According to the Associated Press (AP) on July 7, 2023, for a century, the League of Women Voters in Florida formed bonds with marginalized residents by helping them register to vote — and, in recent years, those efforts have extended to the growing Asian American and Asian immigrant communities. But a state law signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis in May would have forced the group to alter its strategy. The legislation would have imposed a $50,000 fine on third-party voter registration organizations if the staff or volunteers who handle or collect the forms have been convicted of a felony or are not U.S. citizens.A federal judge blocked the provision. The NAACP and other groups that register voters sued the state over provisions in a larger elections bill Republican Gov. DeSantis signed on the same day he announced he is running for president. its passage reflects the effort by DeSantis and other GOP leaders to crack down on access to the ballot.“If there’s not access, in terms of language, we can’t get to as many people, which particularly affects AAPI voters,” Executive Director Leah Nash of the League of Women Voters said, referring to the state’s Asian American and Pacific Island population, which has grown rapidly and where more than 30% of adults have limited English proficiency.In states where penalties are getting tougher, the developments have sowed fear and confusion among groups that provide translators, voter registration help and assistance with mail-in balloting — roles that voting rights advocates say are vital for Asian communities in particular.“It’s specifically targeting limited English proficiency voters, and that includes AAPI voters,” said Meredyth Yoon , litigation director at Asian Americans Advancing Justice in Atlanta.In Texas, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill in June that raises the penalty for illegal voting to a felony, upping it from a misdemeanor charge that was part of a sweeping elections law passed two years earlier. Alice Yi , who is Chinese American, used to help translate in Austin, Texas, but said the new law isn’t clear about whether good faith mistakes will be criminalized and worries that she could get into trouble by offering assistance. Ashley Cheng , the founding president of Asian Texans for Justice, recalls discovering her mother was not listed in the voter rolls when she tried to help her vote in 2018. They never found out why she wasn’t properly registered. Advocates say this highlights flaws in the system and illustrates how volunteers are essential to overcoming them. Farha Ahmed , an attorney in Texas, said the increased liability in helping these marginalized communities access the ballot box forced her to decide against continuing as an election judge, a position that administers voting procedures and settles disputes concerning election laws. “There’s not a lot of resources and there’s not a lot of protection,” said Ahmed. “Election judges want to help make it easy for people to vote, but with these new laws in place, they’re very unsure of where is their liability when they’re really just trying to do their best to help.”A section of Georgia’s 2021 election bill made it a misdemeanor to offer a voter any money or gifts at polling places, a provision that included passing out water and snacks for those waiting in lines. Attempts to get a court to toss out the ban on snacks and water have so far been unsuccessful. James Woo , the communications director at Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta, said he won’t even get his parents a drink of water while helping them with their ballots.Read the AP report: https://bit.ly/3NM9z3s No Longer Suffering In Silence: Asian Americans Denied Tech Leadership Roles Go To Court According to USA Today on July 6, 2023, Vaishnavi Jayakumar joined Facebook and Instagram owner Meta after stints at Disney, Google and Twitter in January 2020. Her job on the youth policy team was to protect children and teens from bullying, harassment and other forms of abuse. But Jayakumar – an Asian American originally from Singapore – says she couldn’t shield herself from racial bias on the job. Soon after inquiring how she could move up at Meta, Jayakumar says her supervisor began leaving her out of opportunities and initiatives that used to be in her scope and “layering” her under less experienced employees. Despite years of experience and positive feedback as a team player, Jayakumar says her supervisor told her she was not senior or collaborative enough to be promoted, according to a complaint Jayakumar filed with California’s Civil Rights Department.While her workload and responsibilities increased, Jayakumar says her performance ratings began to slip. “I've never felt more keenly that as an Asian woman, I'm destined to be a worker, I'm not destined to be a leader,” she said in an interview. “And that's an awful feeling... The generations of men and women before us had to suffer in silence. I don't think any one of us wants this to continue for a minute longer than it already has.”Jayakumar is one of a growing number of Asian Americans in the tech industry breaking their silence and going public with charges of discrimination and retaliation. In a series of recently filed lawsuits, they say that racial biases spanning decades in Silicon Valley that typecast Asian Americans as worker bees have shut them out of management and executive positions with greater power, profile and pay.Research shows that Asian Americans are the most likely to be hired in professional roles yet the least likely of all racial groups to break into tech company leadership. At Meta, 46% of employees were Asian American in 2021, but just 27% of executives. White employees, on the other hand, accounted for 39% of Meta's workforce but 58% of its executives.“The tech industry has made progress in becoming more racially diverse in its workforce but has made virtually no progress in becoming more racially equitable in its leadership pipeline,” said Buck Gee , an executive adviser to Ascend Foundation, the nation’s largest network of Asian American professionals. Asian Americans are left out of diversity discussions and initiatives because there is a perception that they don’t face adversity in the workplace when, in fact, the economic realities for Asians and Asian Americans vary greatly, particularly for those in low-wage and low-opportunity jobs on H-1B visas, said Pawan Dhingra , president of the Association for Asian American Studies president and a professor at Amherst College. “Asians are seen as an immigrant group that in many ways is doing pretty well," Dhingra said. "There is not a major movement to worry about the plight of Asian Americans outside of hate crimes on the street.”That began to change with the groundswell of anti-Asian hate and violence during the COVID pandemic. Participation in employee resource groups and workplace activism surged. More Asian Americans began calling out workplace bias, even in the insular tech industry. “The pandemic really galvanized the community, especially those of us in tech, because I think we all saw that what was happening in the streets was happening in the workplace,” said Jack Song , who advises tech startups on their communications and branding. Song says he was inspired to share his story publicly by Justin Zhu , the ex-CEO of tech startup Iterable who is suing his former company and co-founded the nonprofit organization Stand with Asian Americans to help others in a similar situation. Zhu says he filed a lawsuit alleging retaliation after he says he was fired for raising complaints about anti-Asian discrimination. Not everyone has the resources to fight back, Zhu says. So Stand with Asian Americans is launching a workplace justice initiative."A core purpose of the workplace justice initiative is to show that you are not alone in fighting racism in the workplace. We connect people with survivors who have faced discrimination, give moral support, give legal support and we help them tell their story so they can get the support they need in this David vs. Goliath fight," he told USA Today . Ben Huynh says his troubles began in May 2022 when he was promoted into the management ranks at software company Coda. Huynh says he didn’t get a pay increase with the promotion unlike his peers and believed he was earning less than his peers. So he complained to human resources. “Despite the quality of my work, once I had spoken out, the gates began closing around me,” said Huynh, who is Vietnamese American. “I felt iced out and like a pariah.” “There's a shift because people are seeing that they have to take action or things will not change,” said Huynh, who filed a lawsuit against Coda in June, alleging discrimination and retaliation based on race. “If we want to see something change, we have to do something about it.”But with the industry roiled by large-scale layoffs that are disproportionately affecting people of color, the decision to act can be fraught, said attorney Charles Jung . Asian Americans often worry that no one will have their back if they come forward, said Jung, a name partner with Nassiri & Jung. The few Asians who make it to the top seem hesitant to rock the boat or bring up diversity issues, he said.Jung’s client Andre Wong , who is Chinese American, says he found out firsthand the consequences of speaking out in an industry where anti-Asian bias is rarely acknowledged. Wong, who worked at Lumentum for more than 20 years, says he led the development of the company’s most profitable product line and helped the company expand into new markets.In 2021, Wong says he helped start the Asian Employee Resource group which obtained demographic data showing that while 60% of Lumentum’s U.S. workforce is Asian, senior executives were mostly white, with less than 15% of them Asian. In May 2022, Wong said he was given a “glass cliff” assignment – a role that women and minorities are handed with little chance of success – as the only non-white employee on a team. He says he accepted the assignment with assurances he would soon be considered for a promotion to senior vice president. Instead, he was terminated in December. Wong is suing Lumentum for $20 million in damages. He says he would donate a big chunk of any award he receives to the cause of fighting anti-Asian discrimination. “Asian Americans are the engine behind all these tech companies. Many of these technical teams are almost exclusively Asian American employees. But the leadership in strategic or business positions are not minorities," Wong said. "When you finally step back and see it, it’s so stark.” Read the USA Today report: https://bit.ly/3D4mCsk Houston Town Hall Meetings on Asiatown Community Safety According to Houston Public Media on July 7, 2023, Houston police said they are still looking for a second suspect involved in a shooting robbery that led to a restaurant worker being hospitalized. During a townhall meeting in Houston’s Asiatown in the evening of July 6, police said they arrested the first suspect in the robbery of Holam Cheng , who was shot four times, but still need help on finding the second. The meeting was held to address concerns of crime in the community, especially after Cheng was shot. The meeting was attended by U.S. Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee and Al Green , Texas state representative Gene Wu , Chief Troy Finner and Assistant Chief Ben Tien .Throughout the meeting community members discussed concerns with their own experiences. One speaker claimed he and his sister were the victims of a hate crime, but they have yet to get a case number from police on it. “I ended up with concussion, my sister ended up in the hospital with life threatening injuries, she spent a couple of weeks in the hospital. And I’ve reported it to the police and our investigator,” he said. “He refused to contact the perpetrators, three white men. And he refused to interview them.”Finner said he would make sure that he got a case number and would personally look into the case.Other speakers said they wanted the department to increase officers patrolling in Asiatown, and address language barriers when reporting crimes. Finner warned the community that some see them as a target, and to be vigilant.Read the Houston Public Media report: https://bit.ly/43ciTDD Asian residents in Houston demand more bilingual officers to fight crime The second townhall was held in the morning of July 8 at the Chinese Civic Center. HPD Assistant Police Chief Yasar Bashir , Houston Fire Chief Samuel Pena , representation from HCSO, U.S. Congressional Members Sheila Jackson Lee and Al Green , Texas State Senator John Whitmire , Stafford City Council member Alice Chen attended. The discussion was led by Texas State Representative Gene Wu .According Fox26 on July 8, 2023, Asian residents in Houston are concerned about crime in their community and are calling for more bilingual officers to help them feel safe. Residents said in the meeting they are worried about the recent violent crime in the Asiatown area. They specifically cited the case of Holam Cheng , who police say was robbed and shot six times on June 25.According to an update from GoFundMe , "my father has woken up thankfully. He has been undergoing many surgeries and will be continuing to. Thank you everyone for the blessings and support. We will share updates whenever possible."Read and watch the Fox26 report: https://bit.ly/3D30Rc2 Back View PDF July 10, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #227 1/8 Monthly Meeting; Justice4All; "China Spy"; Repeal of Chinese Exclusion Act; + #227 1/8 Monthly Meeting; Justice4All; "China Spy"; Repeal of Chinese Exclusion Act; + In This Issue #227 · 2024/01/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Justice4All Protest in Miami - A Call for Unity Against Racism · Asian American Officials Cite Unfair Scrutiny and Lost Jobs in China Spy Tensions · White House Statement on Repeal of Chinese Exclusion Act · News and Activities for the Communities 2024/01/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, January 8, 2023, starting at 1:55 pm ET. In addition to updates by Joanna Derman , Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC and Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), confirmed and invited speakers include: · Rep. Judy Chu 赵美心, Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, to kick off the New Year with us by reviewing 2023 and looking to what is ahead in 2024. · Haipei Shue 薛海培, President, United Chinese Americans (UCA), Hongwei Shang 商红伟, and Echo King 金美声, Co-Founders of Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA) to give us a report on the December 16 Justice4All protest in Miami. · Ted Gong, Executive Director of the 1882 Foundation, will introduce the 1882 Project, 1882 Foundation, and its upcoming activities in 2024, and Martin Gold , Pro Bono Counsel, 1882 Project; Partner, Capitol Counsel, LLC, on a future lecture. · Dr. Yawei Liu 刘亚伟, Senior Advisor, China Focus, Carter Center to introduce us to the China Focus at the Carter Center and the upcoming Conference for the 45th Anniversary of U.S.-China Relations in Atlanta. The monthly meeting is by invitation only. It is closed to the press. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Steven Pei 白先慎, Vincent Wang 王文奎, and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . Justice4All Protest in Miami - A Call for Unity Against Racism December 16, 2023, was a stormy day in Miami, but hundreds from the state of Florida and across the nation gathered at The Torch of Friendship to protest the unfair legislation of SB264 and SB846. SB 264 was passed by the Florida legislature and signed into law by Governor Ron DeSantis, marking a troubling return to discriminatory policies reminiscent of the Chinese Exclusion Act. It unfairly restricts most Chinese citizens — and most citizens of Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, Iran, Russia, and North Korea — from purchasing homes in the state. SB 264 has raised significant concerns. Violations of the ban could result in severe civil and criminal penalties, including imprisonment of up to 5 years. Moreover, SB 264 mandates property registration, threatening law-abiding, taxpaying AAPI community members with an unprecedented and unreasonable penalty of $1,000 per day if their properties remain unregistered by December 31st, 2023. A lawsuit has been filed in the Northern District Court of Florida, arguing that SB 264 codifies and expands housing discrimination against people of Asian descent in violation of the Constitution and the Fair Housing Act. SB 846 put a roadblock in the path of Florida's public universities hiring Chinese graduate students and postdocs, which has sparked serious concerns among Florida’s academicians.Both state laws remind the communities of the era of the Chinese Exclusion Act when Chinese Americans and Asian Americans were subject to decades of discrimination and denied their lawful and constitutional rights. Leaders of the Chinese American community from across the country actively participated in this event, delivering inspirational speeches. Prominent figures included Congresswoman Judy Chu , former presidential candidate Andrew Yang , Texas State Representative Gene Wu , UCA President Haipei Shue , Co-founder of CALDA (Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance) attorney Clay Zhu , and North Miami Beach City Commissioner candidate Lynn Su . In addition, representatives from many organizations such as CASEC (The Chinese Association of Science, Education and Culture of South Florida), FAAJA (Florida Asian American Justice Alliance), The Yick Wo Institution, NAACP (The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), LULAC (The League of United Latin American Citizens), and ACLU (The American Civil Liberties Union), lent their voices to the cause. The rally also saw strong support from African American, Indian American, Caribbean, Jewish, Cuban and other Hispanic communities, as well as professors from Florida’s public universities such as University of Florida, Florida State University, and Florida International University. Despite adverse weather conditions, impassioned speeches resonated through the crowd, delivering a clear and unified message: Florida must reject the echoes of a new Chinese Exclusion Act. The rally opened and closed with a powerful group sing-along of the civil rights anthem "We Shall Overcome," symbolizing the collective strength and determination of Chinese Americans to overcome adversity.Visit the FAAJA website at https://www.faaja.org/ and read a press statement by The North American Economic Herald Media Group: https://prn.to/3H27hdt Asian American Officials Cite Unfair Scrutiny and Lost Jobs in China Spy Tensions According to the New York Times on December 31, 2023, national security employees with ties to Asia say U.S. counterintelligence officers wrongly regard them as potential spies and ban them from jobs.When Thomas Wong set foot in the United States Embassy in Beijing this summer for a new diplomatic posting, it was vindication after years of battling the State Department over a perceived intelligence threat — himself.Wong, a U.S. diplomat, faced a ban from working in China due to alleged concerns of foreign influence and preference. With a background in Chinese language and experience in the military, Wong aimed to contribute significantly to U.S.-China relations. However, he discovered that numerous Asian American diplomats encountered similar restrictions based on vague reasons provided during the security clearance process. This issue extends beyond the State Department, affecting various U.S. government agencies involved in national security and foreign policy. Employees with ties to Asia, regardless of their relevance, feel unfairly targeted by U.S. counterintelligence, limiting their potential contributions in crucial diplomatic, intelligence, and security roles.The concerns, notably raised by Asian American diplomats, led to bipartisan legislation attempting to address the problem. The military spending bill of December 14 includes language pushed by Representative Ted Lieu , Democrat of California, intended to make the department more transparent in its assignment restriction and review processes. While there have been instances of bans being reversed, many State Department employees still face restrictions without clear explanations. Additionally, counterintelligence officers can recommend bans based on investigations into job offers from countries deemed intelligence threats.The situation highlights the debate between addressing security risks and utilizing individuals with valuable language skills and cultural backgrounds to serve national interests. Despite some reversals, the issue of restrictive bans for government employees with Asian connections remains a point of contention within U.S. national security agencies. The New York Times report highlights instances of discrimination and suspicion faced by FBI counterintelligence officers due to their Chinese background. This issue has been exacerbated by concerns about Chinese espionage, leading to the establishment of the Justice Department's "China Initiative." This initiative involved investigating numerous ethnic Chinese scientists, often resulting in charges that were eventually dropped, causing harm to their careers and reputations. Despite the closure of the "China Initiative" in 2022, similar processes within national security agencies, occurring within secretive security clearance and assignment vetting, continue to impact individuals.Critics argue that the scrutiny faced by individuals with ties to China is unjustified, citing demographic shifts in the American population and emphasizing that having family in China does not inherently make someone susceptible to becoming a Chinese intelligence asset. However, some officials defend these security clearance denials or job restrictions, citing concerns about the Chinese government pressuring foreign citizens by targeting their family members in China.Legislation in 2021 revealed that the State Department had imposed the most restrictions for postings in China, followed by Russia, Taiwan, and Israel. The State Department refutes claims of discrimination, emphasizing adherence to guidelines from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and outlined criteria in the Foreign Affairs Manual. While there are senior Asian American officials in various U.S. agencies, concerns persist among Asian American employees regarding the ongoing suspicion and challenges they face due to their backgrounds.The passage underscores the persistent concerns of Asian American government employees, highlighted by Representative Andy Kim 's experience of being barred from work on Korean Peninsula issues, which he found disrespectful and humiliating. Many federal agencies conduct internal investigations without informing employees, such as the FBI's unit performing polygraph tests and potentially recommending security clearance revocation. At the State Department, background checks determine whether to impose assignment restrictions on diplomats.The security clearance process for officials is rigorous and intrusive, involving scrutiny of personal relationships, financial history, and more. Recent concerns about China's espionage have elevated the standards for clearance. Documents from the Defense Department show increasingly detailed assessments of China's spying efforts in the vetting of security clearances for federal contractors over the past two decades. In 2021, a Senate committee report exposed the Commerce Department's security unit for unlawfully investigating Chinese American employees like Sherry Chen . The report characterized the unit as a "rogue, unaccountable police force" that disproportionately targeted offices with high proportions of Asian American employees.Even government officers involved in China counterintelligence face suspicion from security officials due to their background, unfairly marking them as potential spies. Chris Wang , an FBI counterintelligence analyst, was placed in a surveillance program called PARM upon joining, subjecting him to extensive scrutiny of contacts, travel, and computer use. Despite his training and background, which included Chinese martial arts and study in Shanghai, he faced heightened suspicion due to his associations. Another former FBI officer, Jason Lee , is suing the agency for discrimination, citing instances where his familial ties were wrongly construed as evidence of espionage.Both Wang and Lee highlighted the challenges Chinese Americans face due to the stigma surrounding China, which often leads to unwarranted suspicions even when their connections are innocent. While the FBI asserted its commitment to fair polygraph tests and diversity, these cases shed light on the complexities and biases Chinese American employees encounter within security units.At the State Department, a group representing Asian American employees has been advocating for reforms to address assignment restrictions. Since 2016, legislation has been introduced to drive changes in this regard.While some diplomats, like Yuki Kondo-Shah , have successfully challenged assignment restrictions, there are ongoing concerns despite Secretary Antony Blinken 's recent announcement of relaxed restrictions. Specifically, the provision known as assignment review allows counterintelligence officers to recommend bans after investigating employees offered posts deemed to have special intelligence threats, extending beyond China to countries like Russia, Vietnam, and Israel. Tina Wong , a vice president of the U.S. Foreign Service union, highlights the problematic nature of this provision. Stallion Yang , another diplomat, gathered data for the Asian American Foreign Affairs Association, revealing prolonged investigations for employees with ties to Asia. While the State Department responded, stating only a few investigations led to rejection, diplomats argue that this overlooks cases where employees left due to extended investigations.Moreover, aspiring diplomats like Ruiqi Zheng , a China-born American, faced challenges securing security clearance due to ties abroad, ultimately being rejected after a nearly two-year process. Despite aspirations and selective fellowships, individuals like Zheng encountered barriers due to their backgrounds, reflecting ongoing challenges faced by foreign-born Chinese Americans within the State Department's security clearance process.Read the New York Times report: https://nyti.ms/48FthXl . Read the case of Dr. Wei Su 苏炜: https://bit.ly/2E13gZU White House Statement on Repeal of Chinese Exclusion Act On December 17, 2023, President Joe Biden issued the following statement on the 80th anniversary of the repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act:"Our nation was founded on the fundamental idea that we are created equal and deserve to be treated equally. But for 61 years, the Chinese Exclusion Act failed to live up to that promise. It weaponized our immigration system to discriminate against an entire ethnic group and was followed by further discrimination against many in Europe and all of Asia. The Act, along with racism and xenophobia in other parts of American life, was part of the anti-Chinese 'Driving Out' era which included the Rock Springs and Hells Canyon massacres. In 1943, the Chinese Exclusion Act was repealed and it was followed by laws that led to an immigration system that better reflected our values as a nation of immigrants. "On this anniversary, we remember those whose lives, families, and communities were irreparably harmed. We remember the brave and diverse voices – from Frederick Douglass to Blanche Bruce to Pearl Buck to the American Jewish Committee and so many others – who spoke up in solidarity against that Act and demanded a fairer and more just immigration system. And we recognize that despite the progress we have made, hate never goes away. It only hides. Today, there are those who still demonize immigrants and fan the flames of intolerance. It’s wrong. I ran for President to restore the soul of America. To bring people together and make sure we give hate no safe harbor. To celebrate the diversity that is our country’s strength. "For generations, people of Chinese heritage have enriched our country – from Chinese laborers who did backbreaking work to build the transcontinental railroad in the 1800s to the Chinese Americans who serve in our military, to the authors, artists, scientists, entrepreneurs, and scholars of today. We honor them, and all immigrants, who continue to make extraordinary contributions to our nation."Read the White House stateme nt at https://bit.ly/48tXKrG News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/01/07 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting 2024/01/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2024/01/09 The Jimmy Carter Forum on US-China Relations in Honor of 45th Anniversary of Normalization 2024/02/04 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting 2024/02/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Back View PDF January 2, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #71 06/30 Roundtable; 07/12 Meeting; Mistrial; "China Initiative;" Yellow Whistle; Alert #71 06/30 Roundtable; 07/12 Meeting; Mistrial; "China Initiative;" Yellow Whistle; Alert Back View PDF July 8, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #25 10/5 Meeting Summary; Know Your Rights; America's Lost Talents By Racial Profiling #25 10/5 Meeting Summary; Know Your Rights; America's Lost Talents By Racial Profiling Back View PDF October 28, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Gang Chen 陈刚 Docket ID: 1:21-cr-10018 District Court, D. Massachusetts Date filed: Jan 19, 2021 Date ended: January 20, 2022 Table of Contents Overview Personal Background “We Are All Gang Chen” Federal Charges Dropped 2022/01/21 Boston Globe Opinion 2022/02/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Gang Chen Moves Forward Photo Album & Links and References Overview On January 19, 2021, the last full day of the Trump administration, Gang Chen, Carl Richard Soderberg Professor of Power Engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), was indicted for failing to disclose contracts, appointments and awards from various entities in the People’s Republic of China to the U.S. Department of Energy. His arrest was announced earlier on January 14, 2021. Professor Chen’s case was identified as part of the China Initiative. Gang was not indicted for theft of trade secrets or industrial espionage – the type of cases the initiative was supposed to bring – but rather for paperwork violations. When then-U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling unveiled the charges at a news conference in Boston, he said, “the allegations in the complaint imply that this was not just about greed, but about loyalty to China.” Professor Chen's case ignited the "We Are All Gang Chen" movement, advocating not just for his cause, but also against racial profiling, violations of academic freedom, and discrimination experienced by individuals of Chinese descent in the United States. A year later, the Department of Justice dropped all charges against Professor Chen “in the interests of justice.” Professor Chen describes himself to be the luckiest among the unlucky because he had full support from MIT, its faculty members, and the Asian Pacific American and scientific communities. “What I endured was not an isolated incident, but the result of a long American history of scapegoating and harmful policy making. Having secured our seat at the table, we must remain engaged, committed, and vigilant to prevent civil rights abuses for the next generation,” he said. Personal Background Professor Gang Chen was born in China and moved to the United States to pursue his education. He became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2000. Gang earned his bachelor's and master's degrees in China before obtaining his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the University of California, Berkeley. His doctoral advisor was Professor Chang-lin Tien, the seventh Chancellor of UC Berkeley (1990–1997) and the first Asian to head a major university in the U.S. Gang joined the MIT faculty in 2001after serving on the faculty of Duke University and UCLA. He is a world-renowned scientist in the field of mechanical engineering, specializing in nanotechnology and renewable energy research. He served as the head of the MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering from 2013 to 2018. He is a member of the US Academy of Engineering, the US National Academy of Sciences, and the American Academy of Arts and Science. Throughout his career, Gang has received numerous awards and honors for his contributions to science and engineering. He has also been actively involved in mentoring students and promoting diversity and inclusion in academia. Professor Chen is among the world’s most cited researchers in the physics and materials categories. He has supervised more than 80 M.S. and Ph.D. student theses and has over 60 postdoctoral visiting scholars. “We Are All Gang Chen” In response to Professor Chen’s arrest on January 14, 2021, MIT President L. Rafael Reif wrote to the MIT community stating: "For all of us who know Gang, this news is surprising, deeply distressing and hard to understand." On January 21, 2021, more than 100 MIT Faculty submitted a letter to Reif, protesting Professor Chen's arrest and citing specific "deeply flawed and misleading statements" in the criminal complaint ending with "We Are All Gang Chen." The letter was spearheaded by Yoel Fink, a materials science professor at the university; it was tweeted next morning and eventually signed by over 200 MIT faculty. On January 22, 2021, Reif wrote to the MIT community, clarifying the nature of the MIT engagement with the university in Shenzhen, China. “While Professor Chen is its inaugural MIT faculty director, this is not an individual collaboration; it is a departmental one, supported by the Institute,” Reif wrote. Gang’s daughter started a GoFundMe campaign which reached its fundraising goal of $400,000 in three days. A “We Are All Gang Chen” campaign was also started on Change.com by Professor Jeff Snyder from Northwestern University. Federal Charges Dropped On February 4, 2021, Professor Chen filed a motion to sanction U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling for his false extra-judicial statements that jeopardize Gang’s ability to receive a fair trial, including his questioning of Gang’s loyalty to the U.S. On July 6, 2021, U.S. Magistrate Judge Donald Cabell ruled that although Lelling’s statement was “inappropriate,” but it did not rise to the level of sanction. Lelling had already resigned effective February 28, 2021. On January 20, 2022, the Department of Justice dismissed all criminal charges against Professor Chen. Based on additional information, the U.S. Attorney’s office concluded that it can no longer meet its burden of proof at trial. The dismissal is “in the interests of justice.” 2022/01/21 Boston Globe Opinion On January 21, 2022, Professor Chen issued a statement, part of which was published as an opinion in the Boston Globe. Gang spoke out about his traumatic experience when federal agents raided his home, arresting him. Despite previous assurances by Stephanie Siegmann, assistant US Attorney, he was suddenly indicted after being interrogated at the airport a year earlier. He and his family suffered for 371 days. Gang said the prosecution was politically and racially motivated, tarnishing his reputation and harming his family, institute, and the scientific community. He criticizes the FBI and prosecutors for errors in his case, urging Congress and the US Department of Justice to investigate and hold those responsible accountable. Gang highlights the flaws of the China Initiative and calls for learning from mistakes rather than blindly moving forward. His son, Andrew Chen, also issued a statement about the dismissal. 2022/02/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Professor Chen and his defense attorney Robert Fisher joined the APA Justice monthly meeting ( video 1:26:07) on February 7, 2022, and shared the lessons learned from Gang's case. Robert explained how he and Gang's legal team handled Gang's case. The investigation actually started in January 2020 when he was stopped by federal officials at the airport, not just a year before as reported. Gang's devices were seized, and he was interrogated for three hours. It is crucial to have a lawyer present during such encounters to avoid misinterpretations. After Gang hired Robert as his lawyer, they tried to get information from the government about the case, but they were not invited for a discussion as is customary. Despite investigations by Robert's team and Wilmer Hale LLP, no issues were found. Gang was charged, arrested, and indicted quickly, indicating a rushed process. Gang's legal team fought back by filing motions against inaccuracies in public statements and requesting critical documents. Ultimately, the evidence gathered led to Gang's case being dismissed. However, the rushed process caused unnecessary hardship for Gang and his family, and some evidence should have been collected earlier in the investigation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZcCvb02o1A Gang expressed his gratitude to Robert, the attendees, the community, and MIT for their unwavering support, which played a pivotal role in his legal victory. He notified MIT about the airport incident, and they promptly provided him with legal representation and covered his legal expenses. Additionally, MIT conducted a thorough one-year investigation through an external law firm, which found no wrongdoing. However, despite assurances from the government of no imminent indictment, the case rushed, and Gang was arrested on January 14, 2021. Gang emphasized that the prosecution was rife with misconduct, spanning from the indictment to search affidavits to the criminal complaint. He detailed seven specific instances of misconduct: The government distorted facts in Gang's case, notably seen in their criminal complaint. For instance, they omitted a crucial last sentence from an email Gang sent himself after a meeting with a Chinese official at MIT. The omission changed the context of the email, suggesting Gang supported China's strategic goals while including the omitted sentence would have made it clear that it was notes he took at the meeting. Gang found it concerning that the prosecutor implied his intent based on the email, highlighting prosecutorial misconduct. Gang also criticized the government's misinterpretation of normal scientific activities as criminal. For instance, the prosecutor expressed anger over Gang serving as an expert reviewer for the Chinese National Science Foundation, despite this being a common practice among academics globally. Many academics were alarmed by this misinterpretation, as it could implicate them similarly. The prosecution used emails Gang didn't reply to as evidence against him, even though he had never reviewed a proposal for the Chinese National Science Foundation. Merely being listed in their database led to unjust accusations. Gang's actions were misconstrued as suspicious despite him acting ethically. For example, when an officer from Taiwan wanted to visit him, Gang, out of caution, met him off-campus. However, this innocent meeting was later cited as evidence of wrongdoing. The rushed nature of Gang's case resulted in an inadequate investigation and failure to interview key witnesses. This rush was attributed to US Attorney Andrew Lelling's imminent departure from office. Exculpatory evidence, such as witness testimonies clearing Gang, was withheld by the prosecution. They had this crucial information from the day of Gang's arrest, but failed to provide them to Gang's lawyers until they demanded it. Despite knowing their errors, the prosecution did not admit mistakes or apologize to Gang. They offered a deferred prosecution agreement, which Gang refused, recognizing it as an attempt to save face. Gang shared several takeaways from his experience: The US loses when we lose the talent of scientists due to discrimination. Universities need to protect their faculty. Funding agencies need to do the right thing. Everyone needs to learn their rights. We need to speak up. As a scientist, Gang never imagined getting involved in politics. However, he believes that politics affects everyone. He quoted Martin Luther King, saying, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Gang ended by expressing the significant toll the investigation and prosecution had on his family, himself, and his research career, which words cannot fully capture. During the meeting, Harvard University Professor Zhigang Suo provided his remarks as a colleague and a friend of Professor Chen. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, but the government does not hold absolute power. Zhigang discussed Gang's arrest, highlighting the government's overwhelming display of power. They spread false information, accusing Gang of various crimes, which quickly spread worldwide. What Zhigang saw were talking heads on the screens – he felt bewilderment, anger, sadness, and fear. Zhigang recalled reactions from friends and the media, expressing his frustration with the government's misinformation. He reviewed the criminal complaint against Gang on Twitter, critiquing its absurd allegations. Public support for Gang grew rapidly after his arrest, with MIT faculty organizing in his favor and civil rights groups advocating for him. Zhigang concluded by emphasizing the importance of public scrutiny in preventing abuses of power and upholding democratic principles. During the meeting, Former U.S. Attorney Carol Lam shared her view on Professor Chen's Case and the "China Initiative." Criminal prosecutions vary based on individual circumstances, and it is the prosecutor's duty to assess each case independently. However, initiatives, while well-intended, can lead to problems. When prosecutions are tied to initiatives for future press releases, it can incentivize rushed or misguided actions. Initiatives often set arbitrary goals and deadlines, disrupting the natural flow of investigations. Carol spoke about the importance of introspection in the criminal justice system. She emphasized that criminal prosecutions are unique because they directly affect an individual's life and liberty. Protections for defendants, like the right to counsel and a fair trial, kick in only after charges are brought. Before that, there are few safeguards in place, relying mainly on the judgment of investigators. She discussed how initiatives can influence judgment negatively, citing examples from her experience at the Department of Justice. For instance, in past initiatives targeting financial fraud, inexperienced staff were recruited, and cases lacking strong evidence were pursued to meet quotas. Similarly, initiatives against false document presentation at the Mexican border led to unnecessary arrests of low-level offenders. Carol stressed that initiatives often result in poorly investigated cases pursued for the wrong reasons. She criticized the DOJ's approach, noting that initiatives should not be used to instill fear or advance political agendas. She expressed concern over statements by DOJ officials justifying aggressive actions and called for a more nuanced approach, especially in cases involving academia. Carol concluded by urging the DOJ to reassess its approach, particularly in distinguishing between corporate espionage and academic research. She emphasized the need for better understanding and sensitivity from law enforcement agencies when dealing with academic communities focused on open research. Stefan Maier of RWTH Aachen University joined the meeting from Germany. The Department of Justice announced the formal end of the China Initiative two weeks later on February 23, 2022. 2022/02/07 APA Justice: Monthly Meeting Summary 2022/02/07 APA Justice: Monthly Meeting Video (1:26:07) 2022/02/07 APA Justice: Monthly Meeting Video with Professor Gang Chen (12:47) Gang Chen Moves Forward On April 13, 2022, Stephen A. Orlins, President of the National Committee on United States–China Relations, conducted an interview in which Professor Chen talked about his case and his reaction to the end of the China Initiative, what it means to him and the broader scientific community. At the conclusion of the interview, Gang reflects on the significant damage his case has caused to his scientific career, including a drastic reduction in their research group from 15 to only three members. Despite this setback, he expresses determination to continue his research and find ways to overcome obstacles. Gang admits to feeling fearful of applying for funding again but vows not to be defeated. He emphasizes the importance of speaking out against injustice, citing examples of colleagues who supported them and invoking quotes from Martin Luther King Jr. and Martin Niemöller. He expresses gratitude for the support he has received and plans to help others as he moves forward. In July 2022, Gang and a team of colleagues reported their research finding that cubic boron arsenide is a highly effective semiconductor, a discovery with potentially important applications in electronics. This discovery was named one of Physics World's top 10 breakthrough of the year in 2022. In 2023 and 2024 , he led his research group to report the discovery of "photomolecular effect." Gang pledges to do what he can to support impacted persons. Although the China Initiative officially ended by name, unjust prosecutions are still going on, and many researchers are still being harassed in different ways. In November 2022, Gang announced the donation of the remaining unused funds from GoFundMe to Asian American Scholar Fund and the Committee of 100 legal defense funds to defend similar cases and provide education and awareness on racial profiling against Asian Americans. Gang calls for continuing support of people in need. One of them is former University of Kansas Professor Feng “Franklin” Tao. Chen has participated in numerous webinars and events to advocate for justice and fairness, as well as American leadership in science and technology, including a panel at the University of Michigan on March 26, 2024. He now serves on the Board of Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), which was formed in response to his arrest. Previous Item Next Item