Search this site

Newsletter - #367 C.A.C.A./AAJC Updates; Jane Wu; Mass Detention Policy; Rising Fear/Collapsing Courts;+ #367 C.A.C.A./AAJC Updates; Jane Wu; Mass Detention Policy; Rising Fear/Collapsing Courts;+ In This Issue #367 · Chinese American Citizens Alliance Since 1895 · Hearing on Estate of Dr. Jane Wu v Northwestern University Scheduled · Update from Advancing Justice | AAJC · Politico : Judges Reject Mass Detention Policy · Rising Fear, Collapsing Courts: Inside Today’s Immigration Crisis · News and Activities for the Communities Chinese American Citizens Alliance Since 1895 Kin Yan Hui was recently elected to be National President of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance (C.A.C.A.), He previously served as National Executive Vice President from 2023 to 2025 and as National Vice President for Membership from 2017 to 2023. He is also a Past President of the San Antonio Lodge.In his hometown of San Antonio, Kin serves as the Zoning Commissioner for the City of San Antonio’s District 6, representing 165,000 residents. He also sits on the Bexar County Civil Service Commission.A retired civil servant with over 35 years of service in the U.S. Department of the Air Force, Kin concluded his career in 2017 as Chief Engineer for four Air Force Cyber Weapon Systems. In that role, he led a team of more than 75 engineers and technical professionals developing and acquiring advanced cyber capabilities for the Air Force.Kin holds a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Houston, a Master of Arts in Management from Webster University, and was an Executive Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University.In his remarks at the APA Justice monthly meeting on December 1, 2025, Kin offered a detailed overview of the organization’s 130-year history, its national footprint, and his vision for strengthening its role in the Chinese American community. Opening with characteristic humor—“As a good bureaucrat, I have to have PowerPoint slides, so please put up with that”—Kin set a collegial tone before walking the audience through C.A.C.A.’s mission: “to practice and defend Chinese American citizenship and to preserve our cultural and historical heritage, because without historical and cultural preservation, we are not a people.”Kin traced C.A.C.A.’s roots to 1895, when it was founded in San Francisco as the Native Sons of the Golden State. By 1915, it had reorganized under its current name and expanded nationally. He highlighted several moments of historic significance, including the organization’s advocacy for repealing the Chinese Exclusion Act, testimony before Congress in the 1940s, efforts that led to the War Brides Act and Chinese Alien Wives Act, and more recent achievements such as the 2012 Congressional Statement of Regret and the 2018 Congressional Gold Medal awarded to Chinese American World War II veterans. The medal project, Kin recalled, was a challenge—“It was during COVID, and we were having a very difficult time doing that”—but C.A.C.A. persisted and continues to locate families who were unaware of their eligibility.C.A.C.A. today includes 20 lodges and roughly 3,000 members, historically concentrated along the West Coast but growing rapidly in the South and Southwest. Kin emphasized that while the national board provides guidance and resources, “a lot of the work that’s being done is really at the lodge level.” His vision for the future focuses on restoring prominence, strengthening impact, and ensuring relevance nationwide. Conversations with community leaders, he noted, have helped sharpen that mission: “Not just for the C.A.C.A., but for the greater Chinese American community at large.”To support this vision, Kin outlined strategic goals: empowering lodges, improving messaging and partnerships, increasing membership, and defending birthright citizenship. Membership development will include a new pipeline, service recognition programs, and a youth advisory council—critical, he noted, because “we are all volunteers, with no paid staff, so we must appreciate every minute we get from volunteers.”On birthright citizenship, Kin recounted internal skepticism from some members who believed constitutional rights were secure. His response was grounded in risk management: “The risk may be low, but the severity is so high that we have to address it.” C.A.C.A. will establish a dedicated project team to prepare for and respond to potential policy threats.Kin concluded by reaffirming C.A.C.A.’s long-standing role and future direction: “I just want to introduce the organization…and give you a glimpse into what we are planning to do in the next two years.” He expressed gratitude for the chance to connect with allied organizations and strengthen shared commitments to civil rights, community empowerment, and cultural preservation.A summary of the APA Justice monthly meeting on December 1 is being prepared at this time. According to Reuters , the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide the legality of President Trump’s directive to limit birthright citizenship. The policy, issued by executive order in January 2025, seeks to end automatic citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment for children born in the United States to parents who are neither citizens nor permanent residents. Lower courts had blocked the order as likely unconstitutional, and a federal judge in New Hampshire certified a class action that prevented enforcement nationwide. On December 5, the Supreme Court granted review specifically in that class action case, setting the stage for oral arguments in the spring of 2026 and a likely decision by late June or early July. Hearing on Estate of Dr. Jane Wu v Northwestern University Scheduled The Cook County Circuit Court has scheduled a hearing for February 24, 2026, on the case of Estate of Dr. Jane Wu v Northwestern University (Case Number 2025L007963).According to the South China Morning Post , the family of Chinese American neuroscientist Dr. Jane Ying Wu (吴瑛) filed a civil lawsuit alleging Northwestern University discriminated against her during NIH- and China Initiative–related inquiries and that its actions contributed to her suicide in July 2024. The complaint claims the university marginalized Dr. Wu by shutting down portions of her lab, removing team members, restricting access to funding, and even having her taken to a psychiatric unit—despite the NIH ultimately clearing her. Northwestern denies the allegations and has moved to dismiss the case.Dr. Wu, a leading researcher on neurodegenerative diseases with more than $11 million in NIH funding, had her faculty webpages removed shortly after her death—an unusual step noted by colleagues. Her case echoes broader concerns surrounding NIH-backed foreign-interference investigations, which disproportionately affected Asian American scientists, many of whom suffered career damage without criminal charges.Read more about the story of Dr. Jane Wu: https://bit.ly/JaneWu Update from Advancing Justice | AAJC During the APA Justice monthly meeting on December 1, 2025, Joanna YangQing Derman , Director of Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program at Advancing Justice | AAJC, provided a policy update covering several key areas. She noted that AAJC continues to monitor developments related to the China Initiative and ongoing negotiations in the Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations process, particularly with the extended January 30 deadline.On the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Joanna reported that both chambers have passed their versions of the bill and that AAJC has submitted its official letter to House and Senate Armed Services leadership. She highlighted the Rounds Amendment (No. 3810) as a major area of concern because it would broaden Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) reviews of foreign purchases of certain agricultural lands. She emphasized that AAJC is in active discussions with Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) and others on the Hill to ensure civil rights safeguards are reflected in the final bill.Joanna also addressed Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s recent proclamation labeling The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) a “foreign terrorist organization” and “transnational criminal organization.” She stressed that AAJC views this as “an attempt to weaponize state power against a religious minority” and is working with interfaith and civil rights partners to oppose discriminatory actions. She noted that CAIR has already filed a federal lawsuit in response.She closed by expressing AAJC’s appreciation for the APA Justice community and said the organization looks forward to sharing a full 2025 wrap-up in the new year. Politico : Judges Reject Mass Detention Policy According to Politico on November 28, 2025, federal judges nationwide are overwhelmingly rejecting the Trump administration’s new mass-detention policy, which mandates that nearly all immigrants in deportation proceedings be held without any opportunity to seek release. Since ICE abruptly implemented the policy on July 8, more than 225 judges in over 700 cases—across 35 states—have found the approach likely unlawful and a violation of due process. Notably, 23 Trump-appointed judges have ruled against the administration. Only eight judges have sided with the government.Courts have been flooded with emergency petitions from immigrants suddenly detained at workplaces, courthouses, or routine check-ins—many long-time residents with families, jobs, and pending legal claims. Judges have described the administration’s interpretation as extreme, illogical, and contrary to decades of precedent, warning that if upheld, the policy could subject millions of long-term residents to mandatory detention. Several courts have publicly noted the near-total consistency of rulings against the administration.Momentum is now building toward nationwide relief. Judges in Massachusetts and Colorado have certified class-action challenges, and a federal judge in California has approved a nationwide class that could require ICE to provide bond hearings to those covered by the new rules. Appeals courts have begun reviewing the issue, even as the administration pushes for rapid consideration in some circuits and delays in others. DHS continues to defend the policy as faithful to statutory text, blaming prior administrations for what it calls overly permissive practices.The dispute centers on two long-standing immigration provisions historically applied only to recent arrivals. For decades, long-term residents in deportation proceedings were eligible to seek bond before an immigration judge. The Trump administration upended that framework by redefining these residents as still “seeking admission,” stripping judges of authority to grant release. With the Board of Immigration Appeals now endorsing this view, federal courts have become the only avenue for relief—driving the nationwide wave of rulings rejecting the policy.Read the Politico report at https://politi.co/4q1yCRR . Rising Fear, Collapsing Courts: Inside Today’s Immigration Crisis In an opinion published by AsAmNews on November 25, 2025, Lily Chen , a first-generation immigrant who came to the U.S. 37 years ago, describes a growing sense of fear spreading through Chinese immigrant communities as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests surge. She writes that friends now warn one another: “Be careful, know your rights, bring your IDs,” prompting her to carry her passport everywhere—not for travel, but out of fear. She notes that these anxieties are shared mostly within “Virtual Chinatown” WeChat groups, where “99% of immigrant Chinese Americans source their information.”Despite her professional roles as a public health nurse educator and film producer, Chen says this is the first time in nearly four decades that she feels “unsafe, worried, and angry all at the same time.” Her fear is deeply personal, recalling watching her father being handcuffed in China even though “He did not commit any crimes and was simply doing his job.” She connects that memory with new UCLA data showing arrests of Asian immigrants nearly tripled in early 2025—from under 700 in 2024 to almost 2,000 between February and May.As ICE operations expand into her own neighborhood in Cary, North Carolina—where she recently saw messages warning, “ICE is currently at a crossroads, Cary. Here is what you need to do today…”—Chen questions how long immigrants must live with this fear. She concludes by asserting her responsibility to speak out, emphasizing that “The immigrant story IS the American story.”According to Border Report on November 24, 2025, a new Migration Policy Institute (MPI) brief warns that migrant communities are experiencing unprecedented fear and instability under the Trump administration, as immigration courts collapse under record backlogs. Enforcement spending has surged while funding for courts and legal aid remains minimal, leaving asylum seekers waiting up to four years for hearings and increasingly too afraid to appear because ICE now arrests people at courthouses and check-ins. MPI reports a backlog of 3.8 million cases—two-thirds involving asylum—compounded by Congress capping the number of immigration judges at 800 and the administration firing or pushing out at least 139 judges. The brief recommends shifting resources from enforcement to adjudication, allowing asylum officers to handle new asylum claims, prioritizing serious cases, expanding technology, and increasing legal representation.Former immigration judge Kyra Lilien described an atmosphere of fear and chaos before her unexplained firing in July. She recounted 50–60-person hearings, migrants fainting as relatives were detained, ICE officers in tactical gear hiding in stairwells, and protesters clashing with ICE outside the courthouse. Detentions in and around courts caused appearance rates to plummet from 85% to 30%. Judge Lilien criticized the structural flaw that immigration courts are housed within the Department of Justice—placing judges and prosecutors under the same authority—and endorsed MPI’s call for institutional reform and greater resources. Advocates in Texas echoed concerns about escalating arrests, family separations, and the growing difficulty of providing legal representation amid expanding detention.On December 1, 2025, Bloomberg Law reported that former immigration judge Tania Nemer has filed what appears to be the first federal lawsuit by an immigration judge against the Trump administration ( Nemer v. Bondi (1:25-cv-04170) , alleging she was unlawfully fired from the Cleveland immigration court. Judge Nemer—a Lebanese American woman who was still in her two-year probationary period—claims the Justice Department discriminated against her based on sex and national origin, noting that two male, non-Lebanese probationary judges were retained. She also alleges retaliation for her prior run for local office on a Democratic Party ticket, asserting a violation of her First Amendment rights.Since early December, the immigration system has come under even greater strain: · New York immigration courts suffered another wave of judge firings, with at least eight judges terminated in one week, according to ABC News . Some courts have lost more than 25% of their judges—deepening delays and weakening due process for asylum seekers. · According to the Los Angeles Times , immigrants who have won their cases or received court orders for release are still being held in detention, as ICE continues to pursue aggressive deportations even after legal victories—raising constitutional and separation-of-powers concerns. · A UCLA School Climate Survey reported by The Guardian finds immigration raids are creating a “culture of fear” among students. Over 70% of high school principals observed increased bullying, absenteeism, and trauma among immigrant and Asian American students tied to enforcement operations. · A December 11 Reuters investigation revealed ICE has begun using family separation threats, prolonged detention, and criminal prosecution to pressure migrants into accepting deportation, prompting legal advocates to warn that due-process protections are being eroded in unprecedented ways. Together, these developments underscore a rapidly intensifying immigration crisis: rising community fear, collapsing courts, unprecedented enforcement pressure, and a growing sense that long-standing norms of fairness and due process are breaking down. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/01/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2026/01/13 Conversations, Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes: Leroy Chiao 2026/01/29-30 The Jimmy Carter Forum on U.S.-China Relations2026/02/02 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the new APA Justice website under development at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF December 12, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #17 "China Initiative" Webinar Opens; "Black Eye" Of DOJ; Who Is Sirous Asgari; WeChat #17 "China Initiative" Webinar Opens; "Black Eye" Of DOJ; Who Is Sirous Asgari; WeChat Back View PDF September 25, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #135 8/1 Monthly Meeting; SCBA Webinar on Dialogue with NIH; 7/11 Meeting Summary; CHIPS+ #135 8/1 Monthly Meeting; SCBA Webinar on Dialogue with NIH; 7/11 Meeting Summary; CHIPS+ Back View PDF July 28, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

The DOJ's online report of the China Initiative has been suspiciously changed ahead of a review by the Assistant Attorney General for National Security. June 14, 2021 Launched by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in November 2018, the "China Initiative" purportedly combats economic espionage and trade secret thefts. However, its scope and boundaries have not been defined after three years of operation. There has not been an official count of "China Initiative" cases. According to the DOJ online report on June 14, 2021, there were 71 prosecutions since the start of the "China Initiative." This web page lists 24 scientists from 23 of these "China Initiative" cases. Cases with ID #XX are believed to be under the "China Initiative" but have not been explicitly listed by DOJ. These cases match closely the Law360 report 'Overheated': How A Chinese-Spy Hunt At DOJ Went Too Far on September 28, 2021. On November 19, 2021, the DOJ online report was changed significantly with at least 20 cases removed and about 4 cases added. The unannounced and unexplained changes made on a Friday are disturbing because an independent review led by Matt Olsen, newly appointed Assistant Attorney General for National Security, is supposed to be starting. The removals are susceptible to creating yet another misleading impression of the "China Initiative." For example, the removals include the dismissed or acquitted cases of Anming Hu, Qing Wang, Chen Song, Xin Wang, Juan Tang, Kaikai Zhao, and Guan Lei. One direct impact of the DOJ changes is the removal of the 8 dismissed cases. The DOJ's online report of the China Initiative has been suspiciously changed ahead of a review by the Assistant Attorney General for National Security. Previous Next Watch Out for Unexplained Changes in the DOJ Online Report

Reflecting on Prof. Gang Chen’s Case & Looking Ahead to the Future of the China Initiative 2022 Gang Chen Acquittal Sunday, January 30, 2022 On January 30, 2022, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), Advancing Justice| AAJC, APA Justice, and the Brennan Center for Justice co-hosted a webinar titled "Reflecting on Professor Gang Chen's Case and Looking Ahead to the Future of the China Initiative." The goal of this webinar is to examine the attempted prosecution of Prof. Chen in order to challenge the injustices resulting from the Justice Department’s “China Initiative.” We hope to educate lawyers, journalists, policy makers, academic leaders, and community members about the harmful impacts of the “China Initiative,” so that they can better contribute to the effort to bring the initiative to an end. Webinar 20220130G.jpg Previous Item Next Item

Anming Hu 胡安明 Docket ID: 3:20-cr-00021 District Court, E.D. Tennessee Date filed: Feb 25, 2020 Date ended: September 9, 2021 Table of Contents Overview 2021/06/14 First Trial Ends in Mistrial: FBI Revelations 2021/07/30 Outage at DOJ Motion for Retrial 2021/09/09 Acquitted of All Charges 2021/09/13 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2021/12/18 AASF Webinar Wendy Chandler - Juror of First Trial on “Ridiculous Case” Mary McAlpin - UTK Chapter of AAUP Spoke Out The Role of UTK Nomination of Casey Arrowood Defeated Photo Album & Links and References Overview On February 27, 2020, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the indictment of Professor Anming Hu, an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Biomedical Engineering at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK). Professor Hu was the second China Initiative case involving a U.S. university professor of Asian ancestry. He was charged with three counts each of wire fraud and making false statements, but not espionage. The charges stemmed from his purported failure to disclose affiliations with a Chinese university while receiving funding from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Professor Hu was the first to go to trial. A mistrial was declared on June 16, 2021, after the jury deadlocked. The jury includes 4 women and 8 men - all white. This was an embarrassing outcome for DOJ to fail on the very first trial under the China Initiative. What was even more embarrassing was the overzealous tactics and misconduct of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) revealed during the trial. On the part of UTK administrators, they concealed the federal investigation from Professor Hu, provided his records to the authorities without a warrant or informing him, suspended him without pay, and fired him shortly after. Without any attempt to protect its faculty, UTK was broadly criticized for throwing Professor Hu “under the bus.” Despite the absence of evidence and misconduct, DOJ opted to pursue a retrial on July 30, 2021, prompting outrage by members of Congress, national and local organizations, the Asian American community, and the general public. On September 9, 2021, Judge Thomas Varlan issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order and acquitted Professor Hu of all charges in his indictment. “The government has failed to provide sufficient evidence from which any rational jury could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant had specific intent to defraud NASA by hiding his affiliation with BJUT [Beijing University of Technology] from UTK," he wrote. Professor Hu was born in China and is a naturalized Canadian citizen. He joined the UTK faculty in 2013. At the time of his arrest, he was a tenured professor. After his arrest, UTK suspended him without pay. His son had to withdraw from UTK due to financial difficulties. UTK terminated Professor Hu’s employment on October 8, 2020, citing the termination was not for cause but for “not eligible to work due to policy or regulations.” On October 14, 2021, UTK offered to reinstate Professor Hu. On February 1, 2022, Professor Hu returned to his laboratory. After a long delay, Professor Hu’s application for U.S. permanent residency was approved in March 2024. Back to Table of Contents 2021/06/14 First Trial Ends in Mistrial: FBI Revelations The jury trial of Professor Hu started on June 7, 2021. On June 16, 2021, a mistrial in Professor Anming Hu’s case was declared after the jury deadlocked. Knox News reporter Jamie Satterfield provided end-to-end coverage of the trial. Although it was not her original assignment, Satterfield was on site to observe witness testimony, read records related to the case, and conducted a thorough, independent investigation. According to the Knox News reports, FBI agent Kujtim Sadiku admitted in court testimonies that federal agents: Falsely accused Professor Hu of being a spy for China, Falsely implicated him as an operative for the Chinese military in meetings with Professor Hu’s superiors, Used false information to put Professor Hu on the federal no-fly list, Spurred U.S. customs agents to seize Professor Hu’s computer and phone and spread word throughout the international research community that Professor Hu was poison, Used false information to justify putting a team of agents to spy on Professor Hu and his son, a freshman at UTK, for nearly two years, Used false information to press Professor Hu to become a spy for the U.S. government. During cross-examination, defense attorney Phil Lomonaco said to Sadiku, “You wanted to find a Chinese spy in Knoxville,” making note of the tactics he used to secure a fraud indictment against Professor Hu. “My job is to find spies, yes,” the FBI agent responded. During the trial, Sadiku admitted to not knowing the last time Professor Hu was in China. “You’ve been carrying around his passport … haven’t you?” Lomonaco asked Sadiku. “You know you’re under oath, right?” “I don’t remember the dates on it. … I wouldn’t rely on that document,” Sadiku responded. Lomonaco asked if Sadiku could return Professor Hu’s passport. During the trial, Sadiku was unable to recall who tipped him off that Professor Hu might be a spy. Sadiku claimed that his investigation had nothing to do with the China Initiative when the Trump administration was pushing federal prosecutors to round up Chinese spies under the China Initiative. He also claimed that his investigation began with an “open source” search for information on Professor Hu, which turned out to be a Google search on the professor. “If you can find it by Google search, how can it be that Professor Hu was hiding it as a secret,” Satterfield raised the rhetorical question after the mistrial. Sadiku admitted to telling university officials that Professor Hu was a Chinese military operative, despite having no evidence to back up that claim. He never followed up with the officials to clarify that his statements were false. Federal prosecutors then shifted their focus away from unsupported spy allegations. Instead, they pursued a case of fraud, citing a law known as the NASA restriction. This law prohibits NASA from funding research involving collaboration with China or Chinese-owned companies. Professor Hu was accused of intentionally omitting his part-time teaching job at the Beijing University of Technology (BJUT) from disclosure forms, allegedly violating the NASA restriction. However, the law does not bar NASA from funding research that involves collaboration with Chinese universities. NASA itself added Chinese universities to its restrictions list and the DOJ under the Trump administration used it as an excuse in 2018 to search American universities for China-born researchers as potential spies. Professor Hu was not the only professor born in China targeted as part of the China Initiative, but his trial is the first legal test of that NASA policy. Assistant U.S. Attorney Casey Arrowood argued that Professor Hu began plotting to violate the NASA restriction in 2013 — two years after it was enacted — by leaving his part-time teaching job at BJUT off his UTK “outside interests” form. However, testimony showed that UTK officials told Professor Hu and all its research personnel the NASA restriction did not apply to its “faculty, staff and students” because they are not “entities of China.” A letter, dubbed the China Assurance and sent to NASA with each UTK grant proposal, repeated the same language. Professor Hu’s affiliation with BJUT was clearly listed in other UTK documents and in dozens of research papers posted on the Internet. Lomonaco also noted it was not Professor Hu who sought a NASA grant. It was NASA who sought Professor Hu’s technology. “They wanted him to work on this project,” Lomonaco said. “(A NASA contractor) sought him out because he was so qualified. (Hu) wasn’t trying to trick NASA.” 2021/07/30 Outrage at DOJ Motion for Retrial On July 30, 2021, the Department of Justice announced that it intends to retry the case against Professor Anming Hu after FBI agents admitted under oath to knowingly building a case on falsified evidence to find a non-existent spy, resulting in a mistrial. In statement issued by Rep. Judy Chu, Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, she said, “Instead of the normal process of beginning with a crime and searching for a suspect, the FBI has, through its China Initiative, started with racially profiled suspects and searched for a crime. Many of the FBI’s cases have been flawed from the start, evident in the number of cases that have been dropped without any explanation, and despite the incredible harm done to those whose lives have been turned upside down by these investigations. The case of Dr. Anming Hu is the most glaring example of how investigations rooted in racial profiling lead to flimsy cases that cannot stand up in court. Worse, in order to justify this investigation, we know that FBI agents have falsified evidence. Yet instead of accepting that Dr. Hu does not in any way present a threat to our national security, the DOJ is disappointingly doubling down, pressing for a retrial to justify their fruitless investigation. We must take national security threats seriously, but the China Initiative does not work, and has threatened a return to prejudice as a cornerstone of policy. Unless the DOJ has new evidence against Dr. Hu, this case must be dropped and the China Initiative halted.” After the government made its announcement, defense attorney Philip Lomonaco filed a renewed motion for judgment of acquittal , which was originally filed on June 11, 2021 . The motion for acquittal was made because "the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction. There is no evidence that Professor Hu willfully intended to deceive NASA... Without the intent to deceive there can be no wire fraud conviction. Without the convictions for wire fraud, the remaining counts would fail as well... In the alternative, Defendant would rely on previous briefings to the Court regarding the lack of intent to harm NASA as being a defense to wire fraud as well." On August 20, 2021, APA Justice and a coalition of nine national and local organizations sent a letter to Judge Thomas A. Varlan urging him to dismiss the case and acquit Professor Hu in the best interest of justice and fairness. The letter provides the Asian American historical perspective on racial profiling, including the government's continuing use of xenophobic labels on Asian Americans such as "Non-traditional Collectors" and "Thousand Grains of Sand," as well as a continuing pattern with the cases of Dr. Wen Ho Lee, Professor Xiaoxing Xi, and Ms. Sherry Chen prior to the China Initiative. The first trial shows that Professor Hu’s case has nothing to do with theft of American trade secrets. It started as an economic espionage investigation based on a false premise and failed with misinformation to implicate Professor Hu as a spy for China and attempt to press him to spy for the U.S. government. Congress made inquiries into the alleged FBI misconduct. It is with this historical perspective and the prevailing facts in his case that we find the intent by the DOJ to retry Professor Hu to be deeply concerning and invidious. Massive amounts of taxpayers’ dollars and federal resources have already been spent without accountability to inflict enormous harm to Professor Hu and his family in the government’s zeal to hunt for a non-existent spy. Overzealous investigations such as Professor Hu’s undermines the U.S. Constitution as the government should have at least a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing before launching an investigation, and race, ethnicity or national origin should not be used to profile people. The co-signers of the letter were: Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC Asian-American Community Service Council Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) Defending Rights & Dissent Greater Nashville Chinese Association (GNCA) New England Chinese American Coalition (NECAC) Ohio Chinese American Association (OCAA) San Francisco Community Alliance for Unity, Safety & Education (SFCause) University of Tennessee Chapter of the American Association of University Professors The following organizations co-signed the letter at a later date: Asian American Unity Coalition (AAUC) Calvin J Li Memorial Foundation Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates Carl Patton, Professor Emeritus at Colorado State University, and The Committee of Concerned Scientists also sent their letters to Judge Varlan urging the dismissal of Professor Hu's case on August 2 and 4, 2021 respectively. 2021/09/09 Acquitted of All Charges The first trial of Professor Hu revealed the zeal of the misguided China Initiative to criminalize Professor Hu with reckless and deplorable tactics of spreading false information to cast him as a spy for China and press him to become a spy for the U.S. government. When these efforts failed, DOJ brought charges against Professor Hu for intentionally hiding his ties to a Chinese university, which also fell apart upon cross examination during the trial. A former juror said after the first trial, “It was the most ridiculous case.” About the FBI, she added: “If this is who is protecting America, we’ve got problems.” Despite the egregious abuses of authority and lack of evidence, DOJ motioned for a retrial of Professor Hu on July 30, 2021. The blatant disregard of fairness and justice outraged members of Congress, national and local organizations, the Asian American community, and the general public. On September 9, 2021, Judge Thomas Varlan issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order and acquitted Professor Hu of all charges in his indictment. Judge Varlan wrote on page 42 of the 52-page ruling acquitting Hu that " the government has failed to provide sufficient evidence from which any rational jury could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant had specific intent to defraud NASA by hiding his affiliation with BJUT [Beijing University of Technology] from UTK. " According to two legal experts, the judge's ruling has particular significance and relevance in similar cases against an academic under the China Initiative. On page 38 of the ruling, the judge wrote: The Sixth Circuit’s Frost decision is squarely aligned with Takhalov’s conclusion that the federal wire fraud statute requires the intent to cause a tangible harm to the victim regarding the benefit of the bargain between the parties. Frost’s ultimate conclusion that the lack of tangible harm meant there was insufficient evidence on the element of intent to Case 3:20-cr-00021-TAV-DCP Document 141 Filed 09/09/21 Page 38 of 52 PageID #: 2333 39 defraud, 125 F.3d at 361–62, further confirms that Takhalov’s definition of the term “defraud” in the federal wire fraud statute is correct and applies equally in this Circuit. The two legal experts opined that the judge required a high standard of “a specific intent to defraud” so as to receive some financial benefits. Professor Hu’s alleged hiding of his relationship with BJUT was not to defraud NASA for money. Accordingly, the wire fraud charges should be dropped. This means that this will make DOJ's wire fraud charge against other professors considerably harder. In addition, the judge carefully described how UTK failed to provide clear guidance and training to the professors on the restrictions of the collaboration with Chinese institutions, which explains why Professor Hu did not fully disclose his affiliation with the Chinese university. This problem is common in nearly all universities in the U.S. and can be used as a reason to fight the charges against other professors. 2021/09/13 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Professor Anming Hu, his wife Ivy Yang, and defense attorney Phil Lomonaco spoke at the APA Justice monthly meeting on September 13, 2021, only days after Professor Hu’s acquittal. Phil led off the meeting with the good news about the acquittal of Professor Hu on September 9, 2021. He expressed appreciation for the interest, support, and help from many to Professor Hu and his family through the trying times. There were many twists and turns in the case. As the first academic to go to trial under the China Initiative, it was very important to have a good outcome for Professor Hu’s case, and Phill could not ask for anything better. Judge Thomas Varlan right from the beginning was open. He looked at the pre-trial motions where Phil set off the facts and arguments. The judge was open to waiting to see the evidence at trial - whether what Phil said in his papers really came true through the witnesses’ testimonies. The judge paid attention and was very much on point with everything in his memorandum opinion, granting the rule 29 motion by tracking the trial. Basically, Judge Varlan found there was no preponderance of the evidence to convince a jury that Professor Hu was guilty even given in a light most favorable to the government. The government did not provide sufficient evidence of guilt. The judge found two reasons why Professor Hu was innocent of wire fraud. The first being that there was insufficient evidence to show that he intended to deceive NASA, or fraudulently represent a material fact to NASA, that there was no satisfactory evidence to prove that. The second theory Phil had propounded was that there was no damage or Professor Hu did not intend to injure NASA. Phil found a case law supporting the theory that if NASA is not damaged, or if Professor Hu was not taking property or money from NASA, or intended to take property and money from NASA, he could not be convicted of wire fraud. Phil cited a case out of the 11-th Circuit that held if there is no harm there is no foul, so to speak. It was a district court judge who is sitting on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. So it would have been Judge Varlan’s boss if he disagreed with that theory. That was another blessing that God provided, Phil said. Without the proof that Professor Hu knowingly and intentionally tried to deceive NASA, the last three counts of false statements were also not supported by evidence. If he did not intend to deceive NASA, then he did not intend to make false statements. Under Rule 29, the judge granted an acquittal on all six counts of the indictment. The last email Phil received from the government said that they were still trying to figure out their appeal options, which Phil did not think they had any, but he would see what they would say. They had a few days to absorb what had happened to make a statement officially in court if they were going to. Phil was very happy with Professor Hu for being a trooper all the way through this process. Professor Hu did not waver to prove his innocence. And that is the kind of client Phil likes – those who are innocent although it is the most stressful type of representation. Phil wishes all his clients had two PhDs, which would be a lot more helpful. Ivy Yang, wife of Professor Hu, followed Phil and expressed gratitude on behalf of their family including three children. The broad support they have received gave them comfort and inspiration to fight against injustice with determination and faith. History is made by people who are the true patriots of this country. Ivy thanked Phil as their beloved attorney and a wise and humble man. History was made by Phil, the jury, Jamie Satterfield, Judge Varlan, CAPAC, APA Justice, AAJC, United Chinese Americans, Asian American Scholar Forum, Committee of Concerned Scientists, American Association of University Professors, Tennessee Chinese American Alliance, and many, many more persons and organizations. For everyone who made donations, provided encouragement, and watched the case closely, Ivy thanked them for providing the strength for her family to continue the fight. She said Anming is an ordinary passionate scientist who only wanted to perform his research and to contribute his talents to the academic world. What has happened in the past years has damaged his career and reputation that was built over many years of tremendous unbelievable hard work. Although their lives have been forever changed and they are not sure of what the future holds, they will be forever thankful for the selfless actions of individuals who believed and supported them throughout the entire journey despite the backlash, oppression, and fear of injustice. Professor Hu concluded with his brief comments. It was still too challenging for him to find the proper words and no words would be adequate to express his deep appreciation for what so many have done for him. The scars and the painful memories are still there in his heart. For now, he preferred to remain silent and let Phil speak on the case and Ivy to speak for the family. Mary McAlpin, President, UTK Chapter of the American Association of University (AAUP), also spoke at the meeting. 2021/12/18 AASF Webinar On December 18, 2021, the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) hosted a webinar titled “The China Initiative and Professor Anming Hu’s Case.” Margaret K. Lewis, Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law, served as moderator. Featured speakers were: Dr. Anming Hu, Associate Professor, University of Tennessee at Knoxville Mara Hvistendahl, Investigative reporter with The Intercept and the author of the book The Scientist and the Spy: A True Story of China, the FBI, and Industrial Espionage, on a case that foreshadowed the China Initiative Jamie Satterfield, Investigative journalist with more than 33 years of experience, specializing in legal affairs, policing, public corruption, environmental crime and civil rights violations Additional speakers included: Steven Pei, Asian American Scholar Forum Phil Lomonaco, defense attorney Wendy Chandler, former juror of the first trial Mary McAlpin, President, UTK Chapter of the American Association of University Professors Mara Hvistendahl led off with historical context of targeting Chinese Americans dating back to the Second Red Scare and Dr. Qian Xuesen to the recent cases of Sherry Chen and Professor Xiaoxing Xi prior to the launch of the China Initiative. For the first time since his acquittal, Professor Hu talked in detail about his experience and thoughts of his ordeal. Jamie Satterfield, despite not being originally assigned to the case, described her investigative reporting. Her invaluable reports significantly impacted public understanding and perception of Professor Hu’s case in Tennessee and nationwide. Wendy Chandler - Juror of First Trial on “Ridiculous Case” A week after the first trial was declared to be a mistrial, on June 23, 2021, the Intercept published an interview with Wendy Chandler, a juror who served on the hung jury. When Chandler was called to serve on a federal jury in Tennessee, she trusted the prosecutors and the FBI. She was known only as Juror 44 in the case. She knew she had to keep an open mind. But surely there would be some merit to what the FBI had found, she thought. The government wouldn’t waste everyone’s time. “I walked in assuming the government had some reason to be there, assuming that they were coming at it with honesty and integrity,” she told Mara Hvistendahl in the first interview given by a juror in the case. “I assumed the best for them.” Chandler understood the complexity and importance of the case and committed to paying close attention, even adjusting her sleep schedule. But as the trial progressed, she grew increasingly skeptical. After six days of hearing witnesses and arguments, she came to a conclusion. “It was the most ridiculous case,” she said. About the FBI, she added: “If this is who is protecting America, we’ve got problems.” The trial ended in a hung jury. Chandler, one of four women on the all-white jury, was one of the holdouts. She came away believing that the lead FBI agent in the case had pursued the investigation out of ambition rather than an interest in justice. She also believed that when faced with questions from federal agents, the administrators who had advised Hu on his grant applications caved and hastily sacrificed their faculty. “This poor man just got sold down the river by his university and everyone else,” Chandler said. Professor Hu’s case follows a long history of FBI surveillance of ethnic Chinese scientists in the U.S., some of it with disastrous results. In the 1960s, the bureau compiled lists of researchers with ties to China. In the 1980s, agents tailed renowned physicist Chang-Lin Tien, who later became the chancellor of the University of California at Berkeley. In the 1990s, an FBI and Department of Energy investigation into Los Alamos National Laboratory scientist Wen Ho Lee imploded in a series of missteps. “There has been very clear messaging from the Justice Department to the field offices that this is a massive priority and they should take it very seriously,” said Margaret Lewis, a law professor at Seton Hall University. “You combine that with calling it the China Initiative and issues with implicit bias, and you’re creating a recipe for unconscious decision-making to occur in a way that can pull you towards certain people as potential suspects.” In February, civil rights groups, researchers, and others jointly wrote House Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Chair Jamie Raskin to request a hearing on investigations of ethnic Asian scientists. Maryland state Sen. Susan C. Lee, who signed the letter, told The Intercept, “We just want some accountability, because you’re talking about people’s lives.” Prosecutors tried to paint Professor Hu as duplicitous. In closing arguments, assistant U.S. attorney Casey Arrowood asserted, “He intentionally hid his ties to China to further his career. This case, ladies and gentlemen, is just that simple.” Professor Hu’s attorney had a different view. “This case is really embarrassing,” Lomonaco countered. “It makes me want to vomit.” The jury began deliberating that afternoon, June 14. It was clear to Chandler from the outset that the jurors didn’t agree. By the end of the day, after three hours of deliberations, they had not reached a verdict. Driving home that night, she burst into tears. “I was so scared for this man,” she recalled. The trial had left her with the feeling that the government was charging Professor Hu to justify its lengthy investigation. “They spent all this time and money on this big giant nothing burger, and they were not going to leave without a pound of flesh.” The jury resumed deliberations on June 16 and discussed the case for the entire day. At 4:45 p.m., the foreperson reported to the court that they were deadlocked, and the judge declared a mistrial. After she was dismissed from jury duty, Chandler found Professor Hu’s GoFundMe page, which his wife started to cover his legal fees, and donated $20. She believes the government now owes Professor Hu an apology and that the University of Tennessee should offer him his job back. As Chandler put it, “He deserves so much, this man, with what was done to him.” Mary McAlpin - UTK Chapter of AAUP Spoke Out Soon after the acquittal of Professor Hu, Professor Mary McAlpin, President of the UTK Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and Distinguished Professor of the Humanities and Professor of French at UTK, spoke at the APA Justice monthly meeting on September 13, 2021. AAUP is a nonprofit membership association of faculty and other academic professionals. Headquartered in Washington, DC, AAUP members and chapters based at colleges and universities across the country. Founded in 1915, AAUP has helped to shape American higher education by developing the standards and procedures that maintain quality in education and academic freedom in this country's colleges and universities. AAUP defines fundamental professional values and standards for higher education, advance the rights of academics, particularly as those rights pertain to academic freedom and shared governance, and promote the interests of higher education teaching and research. AAUP looks into not only questions of tenured professors but also the protection of non-tenure track faculty and graduate teaching assistants. Mary first heard of Professor Hu’s case from Jamie Satterfield’s report in the local newspaper, Knox News. People started posting many messages and questions in the AAUP listserv – What is going on? What happened? Is AAUP looking into this? What is the administration doing? People were upset and confused. Although the case comes down to simple injustice, trying to figure out what happened through reading was a challenge. Professor McAlpin provided a summary of three primary concerns. First was the FBI investigation and how it seemed to be a travesty of justice, which was also what the judge concluded. Second was UTK’s role in this investigation, which was also covered by Jamie Satterfield. One of her articles went into details about how the UTK administration responded to this case. The university is a giant bureaucratic entity, and it protects itself. When an FBI agent comes calling, the university is not there to help or protect the employee. This has happened several times over the course of Professor McAlpin’s career, but it was never in such an egregious and shocking fashion as in Professor Hu’s case. Third was the government's targeting of international faculty. They are particularly vulnerable to losing their employment at UTK which was what happened with Professor Hu. There are many international faculty members working at UTK. Many of Professor McAlpin’s colleagues in the Department of Modern Foreign Languages and Literatures at UTK are on green cards or H1 visas. The international faculty members were probably following this situation very closely, but not speaking out the way that Mary believed she could as a U.S. citizen born in the U.S. and possessing tenure. Mary also said that she was closer to the end than the beginning of her career. As President of AAUP/UTK, she was also speaking for those who might be afraid to speak up, particularly employees who were not citizens at UTK. When the acquittal of Professor Hu came through, Mary and her colleagues were thrilled to hear the news. AAUP/UTK sent an email to UTK Provost John Zomchick, hoping that Professor Hu would be reinstated with back pay and perhaps for emotional and other damages. That was not what happened. Apparently, the university is expecting Professor Hu to demonstrate proof that he was able to work in the U.S. before they would rehire him. The UTK Faculty Senate was leading on this case and trying to figure out what exactly was going on with the reinstatement and the legal issues involved. While Professor McAlpin could not speak to the legality of what happened, the Provost has said that in every case and every situation surrounding this case, the UTK administration followed both the letter and the spirit of the faculty handbook. Even if the letter was followed, Professor McAlpin was not sure the spirit of the faculty handbook was followed in this case. From what Professor McAlpin could piece together, Professor Hu was indicted by the federal government. At that point the UTK administration put Professor Hu first on paid and then on unpaid suspension. According to the faculty handbook, the UT administration did not have to put Profdssor. Hu on unpaid suspension. For example, he could have been reassigned to another job unrelated to the indictment that was in play. It was a choice made to put Professor Hu on unpaid leave. Then, because Professor Hu was on unpaid leave, he no longer qualified for the H1B visa, with which he was working and at which point they fired Professor Hu not for cause, but because he did not have an H1B visa, which he did not have because they suspended him without pay, which they did not have to do. Mary observed that UTK basically triggered their own ability to fire Professor Hu because they probably did not want to deal with the legal fallout of the indictment. From what Mary understood at that time, Provost Zomchick was saying that UTK would rehire Professor Hu but he had to prove that he was eligible to work in the U.S., which would mean having a visa, which was lost precisely because the UTK administration suspended him. This is a catch-22 Kafka situation. The faculty members at UTK and perhaps the Faculty Senate were not going to stop pushing on this issue. This is a clear travesty of justice, and it had been continued unfortunately at the level of the university even after the acquittal of Professor Hu. The Role of UTK APA Justice constructed a timeline on the chronological events at UTK. [subject to review and confirmation by Professor Hu.] In March 2018, about nine months before the launch of the China Initiative, the FBI opened an economic espionage investigation on Professor Hu. FBI and Department of Energy (DOE) made at least four presentations to UTK officials prior to the indictment of Professor Hu. After a mistrial was declared, Knox News published How the FBI manipulated the University of Tennessee to find a Chinese spy who didn't exist on July 29, 2021, raising a detailed list of questions about the university’s treatment of Professor Hu. "The trial also revealed that UT administrators handed over documents from Hu’s university files without a warrant, concealed the federal investigation from him, misled NASA at the behest of a federal agent, set Hu up for his eventual arrest and fired him as soon as he was in handcuffs... It’s still not clear who at UT authorized meetings in 2018 between Hu’s bosses and federal agents or why. Chancellor Beverly Davenport was fired in July 2018 after a tumultuous tenure of less than 19 months, and System President Joe DiPietro announced his resignation two months later... The agents, testimony has revealed, didn’t have any proof of wrongdoing by Hu when they first walked onto UT’s campus and, therefore, no legal authority to take records from his personnel files," Knox News reported. On August 4, 2021, UTK Provost John Zomchick issued a message to the UTK faculty, responding to UTK Faculty Senate President Lou Gross' questions regarding the faculty rights of Professor Hu. President Gross posted his questions and notes under "Faculty Member Suspension Issue" on his web page at https://bit.ly/3Cr67F1 . Citing that the university administration followed the letter and spirit of the Faculty Handbook at every stage, Provost Zomchick provided a timeline of administrative actions taken regarding Professor Hu’s tenured faculty appointment from suspension on February 25, 2020, to termination on October 8, 2020. There were three versions of the Faculty Handbook online: 2016, 2019, and 2021. The handbook says the Faculty Senate President should be consulted when the administration is considering suspending a tenured faculty member. "That did not really happen," said Dr. Gross. "The then-faculty senate president was simply informed." "I have made it clear, and our current provost has agreed, what consultation means," Dr. Gross told Knox News. "Consultation means that there will be time to actually look at the details of a particular situation and provide meaningful input from the faculty senate president." One day after Professor Hu was acquitted of all charges, on September 10, 2021, UTK Chancellor Dr. Donde Plowman informed Dr. Gross and Dr. Beauvais Lyons, Faculty Representative on the UTK Advisory Board, that if Professor Hu "is able to verify authorization to work in the United States in the next year, the administrative termination will be reversed, and his faculty appointment will be reinstated with expectations in place around disclosures and outside interests." In response , Dr. Gross expressed concern that Dr. Plowman's letter was inconsistent with the UTK Faculty Handbook, which states that "full restitution of salary, academic position and tenure lost during the suspension without pay will be made." Dr. Gross also described an apparent catch-22 situation "because Professor Hu lost his work authorization due to UTK action so it is not clear that he can possibly re-attain work authorization without first having his position and employment here restored." In his separate response, Dr. Lyons urged UTK to take steps to reinstate Professor Hu to his faculty position. "This is not only about doing what is right, but damage control for our institutional reputation," he wrote. On September 13, 2021, Dr. Lyons and the Faculty Senate Faculty Affairs Committee which he chaired sent a memorandum including a set of 10 questions for UTK Provost Dr. John Zomchick to address at an upcoming Faculty Senate meeting. The UTK Senate Faculty held a public meeting on September 20, 2021. UTK faculty were also concerned with the lack of notice that Professor Hu received about the investigation. UTK administrators gave the U.S. Attorney’s Office documents from Professor Hu’s university files without a warrant, and they were not obligated to notify Hu. “In a world of data privacy, this is a great concern to everyone," Dr. Gross said. UTK faculty members were also upset with the lack of public support the university showed Professor Hu. According to the memo from the faculty affairs committee to the provost, the university did not make a statement specifically in support of Chinese and Chinese American communities. On October 14, 2021, Dr. Zomchick offered to reinstate Professor Hu. On February 1, 2022, Professor Hu returned to his laboratory. Nomination of Casey Arrowood Defeated On July 29, 2022, the White House announced the nomination of Casey T. Arrowood to serve as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Arrowood led the prosecution of Professor Hu. “This is ridiculous,” Professor Hu said of the Arrowood nomination In an interview in August 2022. “This is the worst presidential nomination ever. I am shocked at this news.” Professor Hu said President Joe Biden should rescind the nomination and, if not, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary should reject Arrowood as a candidate for the post. “My case was a case of wrongful prosecution, and I believe (if Arrowood is confirmed) similar things will happen again and will damage long term the U.S. (government’s) reputation,” Professor Hu said. “If you do something wrong, you should have consequences. Instead, (Arrowood) is getting rewarded. It is very unfair. I do not think this is a reasonable nomination.” After the story was published, a slew of advocacy groups, including APA Justice, Asian American Scholar Forum, Tennessee Chinese American Alliance, and United Chinese Americans, teamed up with Professor Hu to defeat Arrowood’s nomination. “The nomination of Mr. Arrowood is an affront to the Asian American, immigrant and scientific communities,” the groups stated in a letter-writing campaign notice . “It opens a new wound when we still need to heal from the targeting and fallout before and during the ‘China Initiative.’” “Mr. Arrowood’s wrongful prosecution of Professor Hu betrayed the public trust and confidence we all place in our judicial system,” the letter stated. Mr. Arrowood demonstrated his poor judgment, wasted valuable taxpayers’ dollars, failed to uphold justice and fairness, and eroded public trust. “His unjust prosecution of Professor Hu, not once but twice, is deplorable and an embarrassment to our nation,” the letter continued. “In summary, Mr. Arrowood’s track record does not meet the high requirements and expectations for a U.S. Attorney. We strongly support Professor Hu’s request for the withdrawal of the nomination of Mr. Casey Arrowood to be the next U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee.” The Senate Judiciary Committee did not vote on the Arrowood nomination when the Senate session ended in January 2023. The White House did not renominate Arrowood. Continuing Education and Advocacy Previous Item Next Item

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 - #190: Florida Lawsuit; Section 702 Webinar; AANHPI Commission; US-China Science Pact; More #190: Florida Lawsuit; Section 702 Webinar; AANHPI Commission; US-China Science Pact; More In This Issue #190 Update on Florida Alien Land Bill Lawsuit - Schedule and Amicus Brief Registration Open: June 26 Webinar on Perils of Warrantless Surveillance Register Now: July 6 President's Advisory Commission on AANHPI Public Meeting New Scrutiny on U.S.-China Landmark Science Deal News for the Communities Update on Florida Alien Land Bill Lawsuit - Schedule and Amicus Brief According to Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA), Judge Allen C. Winsor has set the following schedule: 2023/07/03 Florida government submits its objection to the motion for preliminary injunction 2023/07/11 Plaintiffs submits its reply 2023/07/18 U.S. District Court holds hearing The July 18 hearing will be held at 111 N. Adams Street, Tallahassee, starting at 1:30 pm ET. It will be public, but no photography and audio or video recording will be allowed. The Florida state law becomes effective on July 1, 2023. The Court may make a ruling on the injunction by early August. An immediate appeal by either side is anticipated. On June 14, 2023, 19 racial justice centers, affinity bar and professional associations, and civil rights organizations submitted a 25-page amicus curiae ("friend-of-the-court") brief in support of the plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction. The lead counsels are: Madeleine K. Rodriguez , Partner, Foley Hoag LLP Robert S. Chang , Ronald A. Peterson Law Clinic; Counsel for Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality Rose Cuison-Villazor , Rutgers Law School; Counsel for Center for Immigration Law, Policy and Justice Gabriel J. Chin , UC Davis School of Law; Aoki Center for Critical Race and Nation Studies This is a list of the coalition of 19 racial justice centers, affinity bar and professional associations, and civil rights advocacy organizations: Racial Justice Centers: Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality at Seattle University School of Law Center for Immigration Law, Policy and Justice at Rutgers Law School Aoki Center for Critical Race and Nation Studies at UC Davis School of Law LLS Anti-Racism Center of LMU Loyola Law School Center on Race, Inequality, and the Law at New York University School of Law Boston University Center for Antiracist Research Center for Civil Rights and Racial Justice at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law Affinity Bar/Professional Associations: Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Tampa Bay Conference of Asian Pacific American Law Faculty Hispanic National Bar Association National Asian Pacific American Bar Association South Asian Bar Association of North America Civil Rights and Other Advocacy Organizations: Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Atlanta Asian American Women’s Political Initiative Asian Law Alliance Chinese for Affirmative Action Japanese American Citizens League LatinoJustice PRLDEF Read the CALDA announcement: https://bit.ly/3qU2Ah2 (in Chinese). Read the amicus brief: https://bit.ly/42DT9Q8 Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) Media Release. In response to FBI policy changes. AASF issued a media release urging the US Government to take more steps to put an end to warrantless and discriminatory investigations on June 14, 2023. AASF and other national advocacy groups have vocally agreed that the FBI announcement falls short of the level of vigilance needed to hold intelligence agencies accountable to the many human rights and privacy abuses they have perpetrated against countless numbers of people—including the nation’s top researchers and scholars that contribute greatly to the United States’ leadership in science and technology.While AASF welcomes any efforts from the federal government to create mechanisms for increased transparency and accountability of its agencies, they call on the federal government to take more serious steps to reform Section 702 and FISA, and to address the legal loopholes that allow warrantless surveillance of innocent people. Read the AASF media release: https://bit.ly/3CBhz2b Registration Open: June 26 Webinar on Perils of Warrantless Surveillance The Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), APA Justice, the Brennan Center for Justice, and the Committee of 100 will co-host a webinar on "Perils of Warrantless Surveillance: The Case for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Reform." (note title of the webinar has been updated) WHEN: June 26, 2023, 4:00 pm ET/1:00 pm PT WHAT: The U.S. Constitution protects its people against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications between Americans and foreigners. Information collected under this law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Asian Americans, especially Chinese Americans and the immigrant and scientific communities, have been targeted for warrantless surveillance that led to wrongful and unjust prosecutions. The current authorization of Section 702 will expire on December 31, 2023. What should the Asian American and immigrant communities know about Section 702? If it is not sunset, what reforms will be needed? What are the next steps for the communities? WHO: Keynote speaker. Rep. Pramila Jayapal , the first South Asian American woman elected to the U.S. House of Representatives; a member of the House Judiciary Committee; Ranking Member of House Subcommittee on Immigration, Integrity, Security and Enforcement Moderator. Lillian Sing 郭丽莲 . Judge (retired), California Superior Court; first Asian American woman judge in Northern California Panelist. Gang Chen 陈刚 . Soderberg Professor of Power Engineering, MIT; Member, National Academy of Sciences; prosecuted under "China Initiative" with case dismissed; "We Are All Gang Chen" Panelist. Elizabeth Goitein. Senior Director, Liberty and National Security Program, Brennan Center for Justice Panelist. Ashley Gorski . Senior Staff Attorney, National Security Project, American Civil Liberties Union Panelist. Brian A. Sun 孙自华 . Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright; Board Member, Committee of 100 REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/42AbNIF Additional information about the webinar including bios of the speakers and references are posted at the Warrantless Surveillance webpage: https://bit.ly/3O6T43Q Register Now: July 6 President's Advisory Commission on AANHPI Public Meeting The President's Advisory Commission on Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders (AANHPI) will hold its next meeting, the sixth of a series, on July 6, 2023 in Honolulu, Hawaii. The meeting serves to continue the development of recommendations to promote equity, justice, and opportunity for the AANHPI communities. It is open to the public and will be live streamed. The Commission seeks written comments that may be emailed to AANHPICommission@hhs.gov at any time. Individuals may also submit a request to provide oral public comments.For details, directions, and registration, visit: https://bit.ly/3NqpQMB .Dr . Robert Underwood , a member of the Commission, also urges all of us to feel free to communicate with him directly at anacletus2010@gmail.com . Read his remarks at the APA Justice monthly meeting: https://bit.ly/3qogBU1 . Watch his remarks at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnIrq1hfl4A (video 11:48 to 25:21) New Scrutiny on U.S.-China Landmark Science Deal According to Reuters on June 18, 2023, for over 40 years, a landmark agreement between the United States and China has yielded cooperation across a range of scientific and technical fields, a powerful sign that the rivals could set aside their disputes and work together.Now with bilateral relations in their worst state in decades, a debate is underway within the U.S. government about whether to let the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement (STA) expire on August 27, 2023.The agreement, signed when Beijing and Washington established diplomatic ties in 1979 and renewed about every five years since, has been hailed as a stabilizing force for the countries' relations, with collaboration in areas from atmospheric and agricultural science to basic research in physics and chemistry. It laid the foundation for a boom in academic and commercial exchanges.Inside the U.S. government, including the State Department, which leads the negotiations, there are competing views about whether to renew the pact, let it expire or renegotiate to add safeguards against industrial espionage and require reciprocity in data exchanges. Given the state of U.S.-China ties, trying to renegotiate could derail the agreement.Read the Reuters report: https://reut.rs/42M8Rsz News for the Communities Confirmations of Nusrat Jahan Choudhury and Dale Ho On June 15, 2023, the U.S. Senate voted 50-49 to confirm Nusrat Jahan Choudhury to serve as a United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York, and voted on June 14, 2023 50-49 to confirm Dale Ho to serve as a United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York. Rep. Judy Chu , Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), issued the following statement:“I am thrilled that the Senate has voted to confirm Nusrat Jahan Choudhury to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York and Dale Ho to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.“Ms. Choudhury is a champion for racial justice, religious freedom, and privacy rights. While working at the ACLU, she challenged stop-and-frisk policies and the racial profiling and surveillance of Arab, South Asian, Muslim, and Sikh Americans. Ms. Choudhury’s confirmation is also historic, as she is now the first Bangladeshi American and first Muslim American woman to serve on the Federal bench.“Mr. Ho has a storied career as one of our nation’s leading civil rights lawyers and successfully argued at the Supreme Court against the inclusion of a citizenship question on the 2020 Census. He most recently was the director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, where he spearheaded challenges on partisan gerrymandering, restrictive state voting laws, disenfranchisement of underrepresented and marginalized communities, and more. “I offer my heartiest congratulations to Ms. Choudhury and Mr. Ho on their historic confirmations. I commend President Biden for his ongoing commitment to ensuring that our judicial system reflects the diversity of our country, and I thank Majority Leader Schumer for his leadership on these successful confirmations.” Subscribe to The APA Justice Newsletter Complete this simple form at https://bit.ly/2FJunJM to subscribe. Please share it with those who wish to be informed and join the fight. View past newsletters here: https://bit.ly/APAJ_Newsletters . Back View PDF June 19, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #349 9/8 Meeting; Revamped Website; CT AG William Tong Remarks; Intro of FALA; Litigations+ #349 9/8 Meeting; Revamped Website; CT AG William Tong Remarks; Intro of FALA; Litigations+ In This Issue #349 · 2025/09/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · APA Justice Launches Revamped Website · Remarks by Connecticut Attorney General William Tong · Introduction of Federation of Asian Professor Associations · Latest on Litigations Against Trump's Executive Actions · News and Activities for the Communities 2025/09/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held on Monday, September 8, 2025, starting at 1:55 pm ET. The meeting is postponed one week because September 1 is Labor Day, a federal holiday. In addition to updates from: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) We are honored by and welcome the following distinguished speakers: · Rosie Levine , Executive Director, U.S.-China Education Trust (USCET) · Cindy Tsai , Executive Vice President and General Counsel, Committee of 100 (C100) · Bob Sakaniwa , Director of Policy and Advocacy, APIAVote · Thu Nguyen , Executive Director, OCA National Center Rosie and Cindy return to announce the launch of a series of webinars co-hosted by C100, USCET, and APA Justice. The dual mission of C100 is to promote the full participation of Chinese Americans in all aspects of American life and to advance constructive relations between the U.S. and Greater China. The mission of the US-China Education Trust (USCET) is to promote US-China relations through education and exchange for China's next-generation leaders by fostering greater mutual understanding of the US and China.Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote (APIAVote) is the nation’s leading nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to engaging, educating, and empowering Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities to strengthen and sustain a culture of civic engagement. Bob will update us on APIAVote's plans and activities as we approach the November election.Founded in 1973, OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates is a 501(c)(3) national member-driven nonprofit based in Washington, D.C. with 35+ chapters and affiliates across the U.S. The 2025 OCA National Convention was held in Seattle, Washington, July 24 - 27, 2025. Thu returns to update us on OCA's latest plans and activities.The virtual 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 . APA Justice Launches Revamped Website Effective August 28, 2025, APA Justice has launched its redesigned website: https://www.apajusticetaskforce.org/ . Visitors to the previous site will be automatically redirected. The new site offers a sharper focus on APA Justice’s mission, improved organization, and a forward-looking design ready for the integration of AI tools that will expand accessibility and understanding.This revamp was led by Vincent Wang , Co-Organizer of APA Justice, together with two interns: Charlotte Ding , a recent Cornell University graduate in Computer Science, and Ryan Zhao , a junior at the University of Texas at Austin majoring in Computer Science. Highlights of the New Website The redesigned site features a streamlined structure for easier navigation across key issue areas. It is built to be dynamic and will continue to evolve and improve. Racial Profiling · The China Initiative · Attempts to Revive The China Initiative · FBI & Law Enforcement · Chinese Exclusion Act · McCarthyism Rights & Fairness · Birthright Citizenship · Warrantless Surveillance Social Justice · Alien Land Laws · Impacted Persons Activities · Monthly Meetings · Newsletters · Yellow Whistle Campaign · Community Calendar News · News Archive on APA Justice Issues Resources · Know Your Rights · Library · COVID-19 Resources · Who Is Chinese American? · APA Heritage Month · Asian American History · Report Hate Incidents About · History and Mission of APA Justice What’s Next? APA Justice is also exploring the development of AI tools and a chatbot to help users more easily navigate and engage with the site’s content.We welcome your feedback. Please send comments and suggestions to: contact@apajustice.org . Remarks by Connecticut Attorney General William Tong William Tong 湯偉麟 is the Attorney General of the State of Connecticut and the first Chinese American ever elected to serve as Attorney General in any state in the union. He is also the first Chinese American—and first Asian American—elected to any state office in Connecticut's history. During the APA Justice monthly meeting on May 5, 2025, AG Tong emphasizes the significance of recent achievements for the AAPI community, particularly Chinese Americans, acknowledging that such progress came far too late. He highlights the persistent issues of xenophobia, racism, and scapegoating that target Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders. He also challenges harmful stereotypes portraying AAPI individuals as quiet, non-confrontational, and lacking leadership. A key point is the community’s limited political power—a reality often overlooked. He underscores the urgent need for increased AAPI representation and leadership across public and private sectors. He points out the political progress of the South Asian community within the broader AAPI group, noting its stronger voice and greater representation, including members of Congress, a governor, and the Vice President. In contrast, the East Asian community, particularly Chinese Americans, has lagged in political representation. He underscores this disparity by pointing out his own milestone as the first Chinese American elected as Attorney General only in 2018 and currently the highest-ranking Chinese American state official—emphasizing how few such leaders exist. He discusses the lack of political power and representation for Chinese Americans, emphasizing that when the community is targeted, there are very few voices to speak up—and even fewer that are actually heard. He stresses the importance of speaking out, especially on critical issues like birthright citizenship, which is foundational for many Asian Americans. He argues that if more AAPI leaders held power, they could both defend the community and help prevent discrimination. He highlights ongoing challenges, including being seen as perpetual foreigners and the rise in anti-Asian hate, but affirms that the AAPI experience is deeply American, not foreign. Speaking from Connecticut, he shares historical examples—like Joseph Pierce , a Chinese American Civil War soldier, and Yung Wing , the first Chinese American Yale graduate and lawyer—to highlight the long-standing presence and contributions of Chinese Americans in U.S. history. He challenges the misconception that the community only arrived in recent decades, emphasizing that many Chinese Americans have deep roots in the country. Whether fleeing hardship or seeking opportunity, their story is not foreign or recent—it's a longstanding and truly American story. AG Tong closes by sharing an incident involving Amara Walker, a part-Korean CNN journalist who faced racist attacks despite her public status. Walker’s statement, “I’m as American as Korean barbecue,” resonated deeply with the speaker, who relates similarly to American cultural identity through food like egg rolls and pork fried rice. The talk stresses the importance of telling AAPI stories to highlight their deep roots in America and affirm their rightful place in the country. He condemns discrimination against Asian academics and scientists as not only wrong but an attack on their identity. Ultimately, he calls for a critical mass of voices to stand together against such attacks—emphasizing unity and collective strength to better protect the community. A video recording of Attorney General William Tong’s talk is available at https://youtu.be/vXDx013lmwA Introduction of Federation of Asian Professor Associations Another distinguished speaker from Connecticut at the APA Justice monthly on May 5, 2025, was Haifan Lin 林海帆 , President, Federation of Asian Professor Associations (FAPA); Eugene Higgins Professor of Cell Biology, Yale University. Haifan Lin was elected as the inaugural president of the Federation of Asian Professor Associations (FAPA) in 2024. FAPA was formed to protect the academic rights of AAPI faculty amid growing threats to academic freedom and due process, especially during heightened U.S.–China tensions. The unjust targeting of Chinese American scientists underscored the need for collaboration rather than isolation. Several Asian faculty associations from accredited academic institutions across the U.S. came together with a shared mission to seek fairness and justice. FAPA is not a membership organization for individuals, but a national umbrella organization designed to coordinate and amplify these efforts toward a more just and inclusive academic future. FAPA’s missions are: · To promote open collaboration in education, research, scholarship, and professional development. · To advocate for and safeguard academic freedom, legal rights, and career advancement opportunities for its members. Since forming its leadership team in October 2024, FAPA has established itself as a legally sound, independent nonprofit organization. It has streamlined governance, built a skilled volunteer team, partnered with Yale Law School for legal guidance, officially incorporated in Delaware on February 16, 2025, and is currently finalizing its 501(c)(3) nonprofit status. FAPA has also launched several key initiatives: · Conducted a nationwide wellness survey—led by the Columbia University Asian Faculty Association—to assess the climate and mental health of Asian faculty. · Hosted public forums with leaders such as Azad Ranjanali from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Ambassador Gary Locke to elevate the voices of Asian American scholars. · Advocated for due process protections in federal investigations, particularly in cases involving foreign affiliations, and submitted policy recommendations to OSTP that balance national security with civil liberties. · Publicly supported scholars such as Professor Xiaofeng Wang of Indiana University, whose termination—lacking transparency—raises serious legal and ethical concerns. · Launched the Synergy newsletter to inform and connect the growing community. FAPA's work goes beyond advocating for Asian faculty; it is about protecting the integrity of American academia. Racial profiling, political pressure, and the erosion of due process harm not only individuals but the entire academic system. Marginalizing any group puts others at risk, stifles innovation, and deprives students of mentors and role models. FAPA believes that diversity is not just a value—it is a strategic asset. Defending that asset is a collective responsibility. FAPA calls for unity in building a more just academic future. It continues to partner with key organizations and invites faculty associations, administrators, students, and allies to join in efforts to drive policy change, share best practices, and support colleagues under threat—emphasizing that we are stronger when we stand together. In the words of FAPA's founding message: Diversity is our strength, and synergy is our power .A video recording of Professor Haifan Lin’s talk is available at https://youtu.be/oho2pPBXECg Latest on Litigations Against Trump's Executive Actions As of August 27, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trump 's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 383 with the following summary: · Case Closed in Favor of Plaintiff: 0 · Blocked: 24 · Temporarily Blocked: 77 · Blocked Pending Appeal: 18 · Temporarily Blocked in Part; Temporary Block Denied in Part: 11 · Temporary Block Denied: 39 · Not Blocked Pending Appeal: 36 · Awaiting Court Ruling: 147 · Case Closed: 22 · Misc: Transferred: 2 · Case Closed/Dismissed in Favor of Government: 7 Among the recent developments is: United States of America v. Russell (D. Md.). Case: 1:25-cv-02029. A Trump-appointed federal judge, Judge Thomas Cullen , dismissed the administration’s lawsuit against all 15 sitting and senior judges of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The administration had challenged Chief Judge George L. Russell ’s court-wide order imposing temporary pauses on deportations when petitioners file habeas corpus claims. Calling the case “unprecedented and unfortunate,” the court found that the District Court judges have sovereign and judicial immunity, and that the suit was a violation of separation of powers. Judge Cullen said the litigation was “novel and potentially calamitous” and that the government should have appealed in the relevant cases instead. The administration quickly filed an appeal . News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/09/06 The 2025 Asian American Youth Symposium2025/09/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/09/08 Committee of 100 Conversations – “Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes” with Janet Yang2025/09/09 China Connections — Chinese Encounters with America: Profiles of Changemakers Who Shaped China2025/09/16-17 2025 AANHPI Unity Summit 2025/09/23 Committee of 100: Is Deglobalization Inevitable?Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the new APA Justice website under development at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF August 29, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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. December 7, 2018 Table of Contents Overview FBI Headquarters Meeting FBI: “Non-Traditional Collectors” and “Whole-of-Society Response” 60 Minutes: “Collateral Damage” “Racial Profiling Harms Science” Links and References Overview On December 7, 2018, a group of community leaders met with a senior FBI official and representatives at the FBI headquarters to convey concerns raised within the Chinese American community about the concerns of bias in its investigations, among other issues. An attempt to establish a continuing dialogue with the FBI failed. Prior to the meeting, Asian American, civil rights, and scientific communities have already been expressing deep concerns about wrongful prosecutions of Chinese American scientists such as Sherry Chen and Xiaoxing Xi, as well as the broad brush rhetoric of “non-traditional collectors” against an entire group of students, professors, and scientists as a security threat to our country. FBI Headquarters Meeting The 90-minute meeting with a senior FBI official and representatives was held at the FBI headquarters. Attempts to establish a dialogue resulted in two monologues. On December 14, 2018, a public summary of the meeting was released: “The FBI stated that its mission is to protect all Americans, including Chinese Americans, while also highlighting national security threats and the political influence from foreign nations such as China. “The community leaders acknowledged the serious threat posed by trade secret theft within the U.S. where intellectual property has found its way to foreign nations, including China. They also expressed support for vigorous law enforcement action where wrongdoing occurs. At the same time, the community leaders spoke about the fear and suspicion created by certain actions by the FBI, particularly related to cases where apparent innocent parties were involved. “The 90-minute meeting at FBI headquarters was closed door, permitting for a frank and confidential conversation. Both sides expressed interest in a continuing dialogue. Community groups who want to dialogue with the agency can contact FBI field offices. Several already have held meetings or forums involving the FBI in Austin, Houston, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. According to the FBI, it has community outreach specialists in each of its field offices who regularly engage with the various communities they serve. “The community leaders attending the meeting were Robert Gee, Vice Chair, Washington DC Region, Committee of 100; Andrew Kim, Visiting Scholar, South Texas College of Law and Litigator, Greenberg Traurig; Aryani Ong, community advocate; Steven Pei, scientist and Honorary Chair of United Chinese Americans; and Jeremy Wu, retired government official." The community leaders brought these talking materials to the meeting: Robert Gee: Committee of 100 Letter to FBI Official Andrew Kim: Prosecuting Chinese “Spies:” An Empirical Analysis of The Economic Espionage Act Steven Pei: FBI Meeting Talking Points Jeremy Wu: FBI Meeting Talking Points After the China Initiative ended, the FBI San Francisco field office hosted a town hall meeting with community organizations in May 2022, beginning a process to restart a dialogue with the communities. FBI: “Non-Traditional Collectors” and “Whole-of-Society Response” According to Inside Higher Ed on February 14, 2018, FBI director Christopher Wray told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that American academia is naïve about the intelligence risks posed by Chinese professors, scientists, and students. His broad-brush testimony targets a whole group of students, professors, and scientists as a security threat due to their national origin and race. In addition, Wray said he and the FBI “view the China threat as not just a whole-of-government threat but a whole-of-society threat on their end, and I think it’s going to take a whole-of-society response by us. So it’s not just the intelligence community, but it’s raising awareness within our academic sector, within our private sector, as part of the defense.” “It is wrong to cast an entire group of students, professors, and scientists as a threat to our country based simply on where they come from,” said Patrick Toomey, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, which has joined a lawsuit by a Chinese American professor, Xi Xiaoxing, who was wrongfully arrested for sharing secret technology with entities in China. “The United States has a proud tradition of international academic collaboration, which attracts the best and the brightest to our universities, fosters innovation and ultimately benefits all Americans,” Toomey said. “The FBI’s mind-set has already led to overzealous investigations of Chinese Americans, with disastrous consequences for those wrongly tarred with suspicion.” The term “non-traditional collector” is an updated version of “ thousand grains of sand ” which was used by FBI analyst Paul Moore during the wrongful prosecution of Dr. Wen Ho Lee more than two decades ago. In response to Wray’s remarks in the Senate Committee hearing, the Committee of 100 and a coalition of organizations wrote a joint letter to FBI Director Wray, requesting a meeting to “engage in positive dialogue to advance our nation’s ideals as well as its national security.” Wray never responded to the coalition letter. 60 Minutes: “Collateral Damage” On August 26, 2018, CBS 60 Minutes updated its nationwide broadcast of “ Collateral Damage .” It describes how innocent Chinese Americans are wrongly accused of espionage related crimes as the government steps up the fight against theft of U.S. trade secrets and intellectual property by China. The 60 Minutes program also has an online segment titled “ The Spy Who Wasn’t .” It describes the lasting impact on innocent Chinese Americans far beyond the heavy legal fees and dropped charges. Their finances, careers, reputations, emotions, and families are severely damaged if not totally ruined. “Racial Profiling Harms Science” On March 21, 2019, three major scientific organizations voiced their concerns about racial profiling by publishing an open letter titled " Racial Profiling Harms Science " in Science. The Society of Chinese Bioscientists in America (SCBA, 美洲华人生物科学学会), The Chinese American Hematologist and Oncologist Network (CAHON, 美国华裔血液及肿瘤专家学会), and The Chinese Biological Investigators Society (CBIS, 华人生物学者教授学会) represent the largest and a rapidly growing professional group for scientists, mostly of Chinese descent, in many biomedical disciplines. The letter expresses concerns about the recent political rhetoric and policies that single out students and scholars of Chinese descent working in the United States as threats to U.S. national interests. Jump to: Overview FBI Headquarters Meeting FBI: “Non-Traditional Collectors” and “Whole-of-Society Response” 60 Minutes: “Collateral Damage” “Racial Profiling Harms Science” 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. Previous Next 2. Attempted Dialogue with FBI Failed

Newsletter - #260 FBI Asks Scientists for Trust; FBI Forum Video/Summary; Texas Alien Land Bill Hearing #260 FBI Asks Scientists for Trust; FBI Forum Video/Summary; Texas Alien Land Bill Hearing In This Issue #260 · Nature : FBI Asks Scientists for Trust in Taking Anti-Asian Bias Seriously · The FBI Forum Video Now Online · A Summary of The FBI Forum by NAA United · Texas Senate Committee Hearing on Alien Land Bills · News and Activities for the Communities Nature : FBI Asks Scientists for Trust in Taking Anti-Asian Bias Seriously According to Nature on June 7, 2024, US investigators seek to repair damage from China Initiative with researchers of Asian descent at a public forum held at Rice University in Houston, Texas.In the rare meeting between the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the academic community, members of the FBI sought to reassure researchers of Asian descent that their concerns over discrimination are being heard.“We want you to feel comfortable. That’s why we’re here,” said Douglas Williams , special agent in charge of the FBI’s Houston field office, which, among other things, investigates hate crimes based on ethnicity. “More importantly, we want you to trust us, so that when something does happen in this community, which I believe it does, that you feel comfortable calling us and that we can investigate it.”The two-hour session, sponsored by APA Justice, Rice University's Baker Institute and Office of Innovation, and the Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition, was organized in response to growing concerns among students and professors of Asian descent in the United States. One reason for the concerns is the China Initiative, a program launched in 2018 by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) under Donald Trump ’s administration. The initiative resulted in the arrest of a number of scientists of Chinese descent and swept into criminal court. Most were eventually acquitted or had their cases dropped. The DOJ discontinued the initiative in 2022, acknowledging that cases against the researchers triggered a perception of racial bias. However, scrutiny of Chinese-born scholars by the US government appears to have persisted. In April, the Chinese embassy in the United States reported that since July 2021, at least 70 foreign students with valid documentation had been turned away at US airports and forced to return to China. At the forum, David Donatti , a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas, highlighted that these students, including fifth-year PhD candidates who were close to defending their dissertations, were interrogated and deported without explanation. Many of them now face five-year bans on re-entering the country. Gisella Perez Kusakawa , executive director of the Asian American Scholar Forum, said that ending the China Initiative was a crucial step towards de-escalating tensions and decriminalizing Asian scholars, but only a single step. “There is still significant progress that needs to be made to ensure that the US is a welcoming environment that can attract and retain the best and brightest talents,” she said.FBI representatives said that while their charge includes protecting the United States from foreign threats, including technological espionage, it also includes protecting the civil rights of all individuals in the country. That includes protecting Chinese citizens working in the United States, said Kelly Choi , supervisory special agent at the FBI’s Houston Field Office.Although the FBI investigates crime, it is not in charge of screening people coming into the United States. That responsibility falls under the purview of US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), an arm of the Department of Homeland Security (the FBI is part of the DOJ). Steven Pei , APA Justice Co-Organizer and an electrical engineer at the University of Houston, in Texas, who moderated the forum, told Nature that although the CBP had been invited to the panel, it had declined. The CBP did not respond to Nature’s request for comment before this story published. When contacted by Nature , Qin Yan , president of the Asian Faculty Association at Yale University, who helped to organize the forum, called for direct dialogue with CBP representatives to address border issues. He also expressed worries about other efforts to tamp down foreign influence, such as a Florida law that limits universities’ ability to recruit students and faculty members from China and other countries of concern. “We are still a long way from repairing the damage caused by the China Initiative. The chilling effects will last a very long time,” he added. Read the Nature report: https://go.nature.com/3XgcAzs The FBI Forum Video Now Online left to right: Jill Murphy, Steven Pei, Neal Lane A video of the June 6 forum on "A Dialogue Between Academic and Asian American Communities and The FBI" is now available for public viewing at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csqLJo869ZY (1:55:23)Time mark and speakers: 3:27 Sergio Lira , Vice President, Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition (TMAC) and President, Houston Council, League of United Latin American Citizen (LULAC)4:28 Paul Cherukuri , Chief Innovation Officer, Vice President for Innovation, Rice University 10:52 Jill Murphy , Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence, FBI Headquarters 14:08 Steven Pei , Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition and APA Justice Task Force17:44 Panel Discussion · Kelly Choi , Supervisory Special Agent, FBI Houston Field Office · David Donatti , Senior staff attorney, Legal department, American Civil Liberties Union of Texas · Alamdar S. Hamdani , U.S. Attorney for Southern District of Texas · Gisela P. Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum · Jill Murphy , Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence, FBI Headquarters · Georgette "GiGi" Pickering , Assistant Special Agent in Charge, FBI Houston Field Office · Gordon Quan , Managing Partner & Co-Founder, Quan Law Group, PLLC. Former Houston City Mayor Pro-Tem · Douglas A. Williams, Jr , Special Agent in Charge, FBI Houston Field Office 1:48:10 Neal F. Lane , Senior Fellow in Science and Technology Policy, Baker Institute for Public Policy. Former OSTP Director, The White House 1:54:57 Forum adjourned Watch the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csqLJo869ZY (1:55:23) A Summary of The FBI Forum by NAA United National Asian American (NAA) United, a non-profit organization that serves to educate Asian Pacific Americans on public affairs, posted a blog covering the forum to bridge the gap between the FBI and Asian American academics concerning research security policies. The blog is reproduced in its entirety with the permission of NAA United: Houston Event Fosters Dialogue on Research Security and Civil Liberties A collaborative effort by the Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition, Baker Institute for Public Policy, Rice University, and the APA Justice Task Force convened a forum on June 6, 2024. Held at Rice University's O'Connor Building, the event (also accessible virtually) brought together academics, Asian-American leaders, and the FBI to discuss a critical topic: balancing research security with civil liberties. The event aimed to bridge the gap between the FBI and Asian-American academics regarding research security policies. · Concerns were raised about the impact of past initiatives, particularly the China Initiative, on Asian-American researchers. · The FBI emphasized its commitment to safeguarding national security while protecting civil liberties. · Recommendations included creating more transparent, data-driven, and inclusive policies. · Continuous dialogue and collaboration were highlighted as essential for all stakeholders. Examples of Overreach: · The China Initiative was cited for unfairly targeting Asian-American scholars. · Attendees shared experiences of foreign researchers facing difficulties at U.S. ports of entry. · Historical examples, like the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, served as a reminder of the importance of avoiding discriminatory policies. · Recent legislation, such as Texas' Senate Bill 147 (restricting property purchases by certain nationalities), was discussed as an example of overreach. · Concerns regarding invasive electronic device searches at the border by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) were also addressed. Building Trust: Recommendations and Solutions · Transparency and Clarity: Policies should be clear and easy to understand to ensure compliance and build trust. · Improved Communication and Training: Regular dialogues and open communication channels are essential. · Involving Experts: Scientific and community expertise should be incorporated into policy making. · Protecting Civil Liberties and Academic Freedom: These fundamental rights must be safeguarded in research policies. · Enhanced Inter-Agency Coordination: Standardization of practices across federal agencies is crucial. · Mechanisms for Redress: Clear avenues for individuals to seek redress if they feel unfairly targeted. · Public Leadership and Advocacy: Leaders should publicly oppose discriminatory policies. The event served as a reminder of the U.S.'s long history of benefiting from top international scholars. It emphasized the importance of maintaining this momentum through open communication and collaborative efforts.Read the NAA United blog: https://bit.ly/3x8F6s9 Texas Senate Committee Hearing on Alien Land Bills On May 29, 2024, The Texas Senate Committee on State Affairs held a public hearing including a session on alien land bills. John Yang , President and Executive Director, Asian Americans Advancing Justice |AAJC, delivered testimony about discriminatory land laws at the hearing.John Yang was quoted in an Instagram post about his testimony:"Advancing Justice | AAJC is deeply concerned by the resurgence of land laws. Though they are ostensibly designed to protect U.S. agricultural land, real property, and critical infrastructure from malign foreign influence, in reality, they not only fail to address legitimate threats in a targeted and proportional manner, but also raise serious concerns regarding the balance of national security equities with civil rights, federal pre-emption, and other issues related to building and maintaining a robust local economy."It is also important to note that some land laws include overly punitive criminal and civil penalties. This language similarly fails to address national security concerns and instead contributes to an overall environment of fear for the Asian immigrant and Asian American communities which have already endured the China Initiative and a spike in anti-Asian hate during the COVID-19 pandemic."It is critical that this country recognizes its problematic treatment of Asian Americans and immigrants as perpetual foreigners and national security threats based on race, ethnicity, and national origin ... civil rights organizations have stepped up to fight this type of discrimination. Florida, which enacted its own land law in May 2023, currently faces two separate lawsuits from the American Civil Liberties Union and Advancing Justice | AAJC. "The current crop of land laws is neither an appropriate nor a constructive policy remedy. Vague, overbroad land acquisition restrictions that could apply to entire nationalities implicate individuals and institutions outside of the scope of the actual bad actors and their machinations. And such laws will only result in a backlash against Asian Americans and other American immigrant communities."Watch the Texas Senate Committee hearing: https://bit.ly/4bRDbHA (13:32:49). Watch John Yang's testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDDeTCAbA64 (5:38) .Read the Instagram post at https://bit.ly/45hi3YG News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/06/20 U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy – Teachers Workshop2024/06/20-22 Social Equity Leadership Conference2024/06/27-30 UCA: 2024 Chinese American ConventionVisit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. 2. President’s Advisory Commission on AANHPI Public Meetings WHAT : President's Advisory Commission Public Meeting WHEN: · July 1, 2024, 11:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Eastern Time · July 2, 2024, 2:00 p.m.-6:00 p.m. ET. WHERE: · July 1, livestreaming · July 2, in-person listening session in Saint Paul, Minnesota HOST: The President’s Advisory Commission on Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (AANHPI) COMMENTS: The Commission seeks responses to several questions contained within this Federal Register Notice. Written comments are welcomed throughout the development of the Commission’s recommendations and may be emailed to AANHPICommission@hhs.gov at any time. Individuals may also submit a request to provide oral public comments at the Commission’s July 2, 2024 listening session in Minnesota responding to those questions. For details and directions, please click here . REGISTRATION: Registration is required · July 1: https://bit.ly/3RjiJHm · July 2: https://bit.ly/3KAUzUX Back View PDF June 10, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #259 Forum Today; Translation; 5/6 Meeting Summary; Research Security; Teachers Workshop; + #259 Forum Today; Translation; 5/6 Meeting Summary; Research Security; Teachers Workshop; + In This Issue #259 · Forum Today: A Dialogue Between Communities with The FBI · Translation of Commentary by Carter Center · 2024/05/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Summary · Workshop on Research Security · Teachers Workshop on "U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy" · News and Activities for the Communities Forum Today: A Dialogue Between Communities with The FBI Today is the day the Baker Institute and the Office of Innovation at Rice University, the Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition, and APA Justice will co-host a hybrid forum titled " A Dialogue Between the Academic and Asian American Communities and the FBI ," starting at 4 pm Central Time .The event brings together Jill Murphy , deputy assistant director of counterintelligence at the FBI, and the leadership of the FBI’s Houston field office for a dialogue with members of the academic and Asian American communities. It will examine gaps between national science and technology policy and its implementation. It will also explore the possibility of establishing a regular communication channel between the academic and Asian American communities with FBI field offices. Register to join the forum in person: https://bit.ly/4aFwvuK . Register to join the forum: https://bit.ly/3wjg759 . Translation of Commentary by Carter Center The Commentary by Neal Lane , Steven Pei , and Jeremy Wu on "An Urgent Call for Clear and Fair Law Enforcement Guidelines and Procedures for Research Security" has been translated into simplified Chinese and posted at the US-China Perception Monitor of the Carter Center: https://bit.ly/4ej0agv .The Commentary was originally published by Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy; full text is available here . The views expressed therein are those of the individual author(s), and do not necessarily represent the views of Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. The Baker Institute has exclusively authorized the Carter Center to translate and publish this article. 2024/05/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Summary The May 6, 2024, APA Justice monthly meeting summary is now available at https://bit.ly/3VswvKd . We thank the following speakers for their remarks and updates: · Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, nisha.ramachandran@mail.house.gov , provided updates from CAPAC · Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC, provided updates from AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), gpkusakawa@aasforum.org , provided updates from AASF · Nabila Mansoor , President, Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition (TMAC), and Kenneth M. Evans , Scholar in Science and Technology Policy, Baker Institute for Public Policy, Rice University, reported on "A Forum with the Asian American and Academic Communities and the FBI in Houston." · Rebecca Lynn Spyke Keiser , Chief of Research Security Strategy and Policy, National Science Foundation (NSF), provided updates from NSF, with comments by Tam Dao , Assistant Vice President for Research Security, Office of Innovation at Rice University on a workshop on NSF's Research on Research Security Program on May 23-24, 2024. Read the 2024/05/06 monthly meeting summary: https://bit.ly/3VswvKd . Read past monthly meeting summaries: https://bit.ly/3kxkqxP Workshop on Research Security Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy hosted a two-part workshop to advance the emerging field of research on research security (RoRS). Supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF), this event included a virtual session on May 2 and an in-person gathering on May 23-24. The workshop featured experts from public policy, mathematics, physics, computer sciences, engineering and the social sciences, aiming to address issues in research security.Participants from around the globe, including representatives from the EU, UK, Canada, Australia, and Japan, collaborated to identify current challenges and develop a future roadmap for NSF’s RoRS program, which was launched in July 2023. This initiative is in response to the CHIPS and Science Act and aims to enhance the study of research security. Tam Dao , the assistant vice president for research security at Rice University and a former FBI agent, tasked attendees with creating testable hypotheses and research methods. Ramamoorthy Ramesh , Rice’s executive vice president for research, emphasized the global nature of research security and the need for international cooperation. Rebecca Keiser , NSF’s chief of research security strategy and policy, highlighted the importance of using data to influence policy and advocated for forming a community of practice to integrate various research fields. Kenny Evans from the Baker Institute expressed hope that the workshop's outcomes would shape future federal research security policies. The workshop titled "Responsible Collaboration through Appropriate Research Security," aimed to foster a balance between securing research and maintaining open international collaborations. Read the Rice News report on the workshop: https://bit.ly/3Xdy146 Teachers Workshop on "U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy" With U.S. elections looming, political campaigns have and continue to portray China in an unfavorable light, undermining decades-long efforts to build constructive bilateral relations, which has local and global implications. This virtual workshop hosted by 1990 Institute will feature expert speakers who will discuss some of the important strategic issues shaping U.S.-China relations, including trade, technology, and Taiwan.In today’s interconnected world, this workshop addresses the needs of the many middle and high school educators who are interested in deepening their understanding of U.S.-China relations, untangling political rhetoric from actual policies, and incorporating this knowledge into their teaching. This workshop will help attendees promote critical thinking, understand policy implications, augment current knowledge of U.S.-China relations, and build media literacy. APA Justice is a co-sponsor of this workshop. WHAT: U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy – Teachers Workshop WHEN: June 20, 2024, 7:00 pm ET WHAT: Online Webinar HOST: 1990 Institute Moderator: Ha-Yu Sebastian Cherng, Vice Dean for Research and Equity, Office of Research and Office of Diversity, Equity, and Belonging; Associate Professor of International Education, New York University Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development. Panelists: · Neysun Mahboubi, Director of the Penn Project on the Future of U.S.-China Relations, University of Pennsylvania · Susan Thornton, Senior Fellow and Visiting Lecturer in Law, Yale University Law School Paul Tsai China Center; Director of the Forum on Asia-Pacific Security, National Committee on American Foreign Policy; and Non-Resident Fellow, Brookings Institution REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/3x4hnt7 News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/06/06 A Dialogue Between Academic/AAPI Communities with The FBI2024/06/20 U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy – Teachers Workshop2024/06/20-22 Social Equity Leadership Conference2024/06/27-30 UCA: 2024 Chinese American ConventionVisit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. Back View PDF June 6, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter