Birthright Citizenship WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME Go Go Prev Next Table of Contents What is Birthright Citizenship? Donald Trump Executive Order Why Protect Birthright Citizenship? Timeline Visualization Historical Context Related Media Legal Battles Summary What is Birthright Citizenship? Birthright citizenship grants automatic citizenship to individuals born within a country's territory, regardless of their parents' nationality or immigration status. In the United States, it is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution , which states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Back to Table of Contents Donald Trump Executive Order On January 20, 2025 Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14160 seeking to end birthright citizenship in the United States. Read the executive order here . Threats to Birthright Citizenship Executive Actions : Attempts to redefine or restrict citizenship via executive orders. Legislative Proposals : Bills challenging the interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Misinformation : Campaigns framing birthright citizenship as a "loophole" or "anchor baby" issue. Court Challenges : Lawsuits aiming to reinterpret the jurisdiction clause of the 14th Amendment. Back to Table of Contents Why Protect Birthright Citizenship? Legal Foundation : It upholds the principles of equality and inclusion. Stability : Ensures clarity in citizenship rights and avoids creating stateless individuals. Economic Contributions : Children born as citizens contribute to the nation’s workforce, innovation, and economy. Human Rights : Aligns with international norms discouraging discrimination based on ancestry or immigration status. How to Protect Birthright Citizenship Advocacy : Support organizations fighting to uphold constitutional rights (e.g., ACLU, JACL, Asian Americans Advancing Justice). Engage in grassroots campaigns to raise awareness. Education : Inform communities about the 14th Amendment and its protections. Share historical examples, such as Wong Kim Ark's case and Japanese American Internment, to highlight the consequences of eroding citizenship rights. Legislation : Advocate for laws that reaffirm birthright citizenship and oppose restrictive measures. Support elected officials who prioritize protecting constitutional rights. Judicial Defense : Monitor legal challenges and support amicus briefs defending birthright citizenship. Fund and back litigation efforts to uphold the 14th Amendment. Community Action : Build coalitions with diverse groups affected by immigration and citizenship issues. Amplify personal stories to humanize the issue and dispel negative stereotypes. Key Talking Points Constitutional Mandate : Birthright citizenship is a core constitutional right, upheld by over a century of legal precedent, including the landmark Wong Kim Ark decision. Historical Lessons : The Wong Kim Ark case and Japanese American Internment remind us of the dangers of prejudice and the importance of protecting citizenship rights. American Values : Birthright citizenship reflects principles of fairness, equality, and the immigrant roots of the U.S. Economic Impact : Policies undermining birthright citizenship harm economic growth and social cohesion. Back to Table of Contents Timeline Visualization Source: https://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/2139841/Birthright-Citizenship/ Back to Table of Contents Historical Context 1790: The Naturalization Act of 1790 The first Act to define parameters for citizenship by naturalization, this Act limited naturalization to white, male property owners who had resided in the U.S. for at least two years, setting an early precedent for exclusive definitions of American citizenship. Resources https://immigrationhistory.org/item/1790-nationality-act/ https://www.visitthecapitol.gov/artifact/h-r-40-naturalization-bill-march-4-1790 1857: Dred Scott v. Sandford Dred Scott, an enslaved man, sued for his freedom, arguing that his past residence in free territories made him a free man. The Supreme Court ruled that, because Scott was of African descent, he could not be considered an American citizen and therefore did not have standing to sue in federal court. This landmark case resulted in the denial of citizenship from all individuals of African descent in the United States and entrenched the idea that American citizenship was linked to race. Resources https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/dred-scott-v-sandford https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_dred.html 1868: Ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment The Fourteenth Amendment granted citizenship to all persons “born or naturalized in the United States” and guaranteed all citizens “equal protection of the laws” in an attempt to address the grievances established in Dred Scott v. Sandford. The Fourteenth Amendment was the second of three amendments adopted during Reconstruction following the Civil War. Resources https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/14th-amendment https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/it-was-today-congress-approved-the-14th-amendment 1868: Burlingame Treaty Signed six years after authorization for construction of the Transcontinental Railroad, this agreement secured U.S. access to Chinese laborers, granting Chinese free immigration and travel within the U.S. and granting China most favored nation status in trade. This treaty was reversed by the Angell Treaty in 1868. Resources https://immigrationhistory.org/item/burlingame-treaty-of-1868/ https://immigrationhistory.org/item/angell-treaty-of-1880/ 1875: Page Act In writing, this Act prohibited the "importation of women for the purposes of prostitution" and the recruitment of laborers from Asia who were not brought to the U.S. of their own volition. In practice, this law prevented Chinese women from migrating to the U.S., essentially requiring Chinese men to leave the U.S. if they wished to get married. The Page Act was repealed in 1974.\ Resources https://www.history.com/articles/chinese-immigration-page-act-women 1882: Chinese Exclusion Act and Chinese Immigration The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 prohibited the immigration of Chinese laborers for 10 years, the first act of its kind to place broad restrictions on immigration. The Act served as a response to growing anti-China sentiment in the U.S., particularly from other workers in the American economy who felt they faced increased job competition. In 1888, Congress passed the Scott Act, forbidding reentry into the U.S. after a visit to China. The Geary Act of 1892 extended Chinese exclusion for another 10 years and incorporated Hawaii and the Philippines. In 1943, Congress repealed the exclusion acts, two years after China joined the Allied Nations during World War II. Only in 2011 did Congress officially condemn the Chinese Exclusion Act with the unanimous passing of Senate Resolution 201 and House Resolution 683. Resources https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/chinese-exclusion-act#:~:text=In%20the%20spring%20of%201882,immigrating%20to%20the%20United%20States https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/chinese-immigration 1886: Yick Wo v. Hopkins In this case, the court determined that Chinese immigrants, though not citizens of the U.S., were still entitled to equal protections under the Fourteenth Amendment. Resources https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/118us356 1898: United States v. Wong Kim Ark Wong Kim Ark, born in San Francisco to Chinese parents, was denied reentry into the U.S. after a trip abroad, as officials argued he was not a citizen due to the Chinese Exclusion Act. In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, regardless of parental citizenship. This landmark case cemented the principle of birthright citizenship and set a crucial precedent for defending the rights of children born to immigrants. Resources https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/a-look-back-at-the-wong-kim-ark-decision https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/united_states_v._wong_kim_ark 1906: The Naturalization Act of 1906 This Act required all immigrants to learn English in order to become naturalized citizens. Resources https://www.nvlchawaii.org/limits-japanese-immigration-us-enters-wwi/ 1922: Ozawa v. United States Takao Ozawa, a Japanese man who moved to the U.S. for college and began a family in Hawaii, applied for citizenship and was rejected due to his race, despite meeting all non-racial qualifications. This landmark decision determined all Issei ineligible for citizenship, reinforcing racial barriers to citizenship and solidifying the exclusion of Asian immigrants from naturalization. Resources https://encyclopedia.densho.org/Ozawa_v._United_States https://www.nvlchawaii.org/limits-japanese-immigration-us-enters-wwi/ 1924: Immigration Act of 1924 This act established a national origins quota in order to severely restrict the number of immigrants entering the U.S. The quota provided immigration visas to two-percent of the total number of people of existing nationalities in the U.S but also included natural-born citizens, so the number of people allowed from the British Isles and Western Europe was higher than elsewhere. The act also prohibited immigration from those countries who were already ineligible for citizenship in the U.S. Since all people of Asian lineage were prohibited from naturalizing, this meant that even those who could immigrate but not naturalize, such as the Japanese, could now not do either. The act also severely restricted the number of European Jews and refugees fleeing fascism and the Holocaust. Although this violated the Gentlemen’s Agreement, the U.S. government remained firm. Resources https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/1924-us-immigration-act-history 1924: Indian Citizenship Act (Snyder Act) The Indian Citizenship Act granted citizenship to all Native Americans born in the U.S. The right to vote was still governed by state law, leaving some Native Americans unable to vote until 1957. Resources https://www.loc.gov/item/today-in-history/june-02/ 1925: Chang Chan v. Nagle Under the Immigration Act of 1924, the Supreme Court determined that Chinese women were ineligible for citizenship and thus could not qualify as non-quota immigrants to the U.S., due to their Chinese descent. Thus, Chinese wives of American citizens were not allowed entry into the U.S. Resources https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/268/346/ 1942: Japanese Internment During World War II, over 120,000 Japanese Americans – two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens by birth – were forcibly removed from their homes and incarcerated without due process. This demonstrated how prejudice can undermine constitutional rights. Only in 1988 did Congress and President Reagan sign the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 expressing regret for the injustice of internment and offering $20,000 to each incarcerated individual. Resources https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/japanese-relocation https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/japanese-american-relocation 1952: McCarran-Walter Act This act continued the controversial quota system established in the Immigration Act of 1924. While the act finally allowed universal Asian immigration and naturalization, the quota system ensured that eighty-five percent of annually available visas were allotted to people of northern and western European heritage. Resources https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/immigration-act https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/Brief21%20-%20McCarran-Walter.pdf 1982: Plyler v. Doe A Texas education law allowed the state to deny funding for educating children of non-citizens. The Supreme Court struck down this law, ruling that non-citizens and their children were afforded Fourteenth Amendment protections under the Equal Protection Clause. Resources https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/202/ https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/access-education-rule-law Back to Table of Contents Related Media 2025/05/09 San Francisco Bay Times: Standing Up for Birthright Citizenship: A Personal Reflection 2025/04/11 AALDEF: With 80+ Asian American organizations and race and law centers, AALDEF submits brief in support of birthright citizenship 2025/04/09 NAPABA: NAPABA Leads Broad Coalition to Defend Birthright Citizenship in Court 2025/03/28 Edgar Chen and Chris M. Kwok in Just Security (translation by Juan Zhang) - 特朗普政府重塑《第十四修正案》 ——《黄金德案》并未限制出生公民权 2025/03/28 Edgar Chen and Chris M. Kwok in Just Security - The Trump Administration’s 14th Amendment Retcon: ‘Wong Kim Ark’ Does Not Limit Birthright Citizenship 2025/03/28 CAPAC press release: CAPAC Chair Meng Statement on the Anniversary of United States v. Wong Kim Ark Decision 2025/01/24 PBS: What to know about the legal battle over Trump’s attempt to end birthright citizenship 2025/01/23 New York Times: “Judge Temporarily Blocks Trump’s Executive Order to End Birthright Citizenship” 2025/01/23 ABC News: “What to Make of Trump’s Attempt to End Birthright Citizenship” 2025/03/31 Senator Tim Kaine Letter 2018/11/01 Pew Research Center. “Number of U.S.-Born Babies with Unauthorized Immigrant Parents Has Fallen Since 2007” 2018/01/11 Congressional Research Service: The Citizenship Clause and “Birthright Citizenship”: A Brief Legal Overview 1898/03/28 Justia: United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 1868/07/09 National Archives: 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Civil Rights (1868) Japanese American Citizens League: The Japanese American Experience Chinese Historical Society of New England. Exclusion Acts and Legal Resistance Global Birthright Citizenship Laws Law Library of Congress. “Birthright Citizenship Conditions.” More info here . Global Birthright Citizenship Laws Back to Table of Contents Legal Battles On January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration issued an executive order seeking to strip certain babies born in the United States of their U.S. citizenship. The following lawsuits have been filed to stop the implementation of the executive order. 1. New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Trump (1:25-cv00038) U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire File Date: January 20, 2025 Plaintiffs: New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and Make the Road New York Legal Team: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), along with its affiliates in New Hampshire, Maine, and Massachusetts, the Asian Law Caucus, the State Democracy Defenders Fund, and the Legal Defense Fund 2. Doe v. Trump (1:25-cv-10136) U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts File Date: January 20, 2025 Plaintiffs: Jane Doe and others Legal Team: Lawyers for Civil Rights 3. Thien Le v. Donald J. Trump (8:25-cv-00104) U.S. District Court for the Central District of California File Date: January 20, 2025 Plaintiff: Thien Le Legal Team: TFC Legal Services & Associates 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington File Date: January 21, 2025 Plaintiffs: State of Washington, along with Arizona, Illinois, and Oregon 5. State of New Jersey v. Trump (1:25-cv-10139) U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts File Date: January 21, 2025 Plaintiffs: the State of New Jersey, along with 17 other states, San Francisco, Washington DC. At least 72 jurisdictions across 24 states have joined the legal challenge 6. CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland File Date: January 21, 2025 Plaintiffs: CASA Inc., the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, and individual plaintiffs Maribel, Juana, Trinidad Garcia, Monica, and Liza Legal Team: Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, 7. Franco Aleman v. Trump (2:25-cv-00163) - merged into 4 on 2025/01/27 U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington File Date: January 24, 2025 Date Terminated: January 27, 2025 Plaintiffs: Class action led by Cherly Norales Castillo, Alicia Chavarria Lopez, and Delmy Franco Aleman Legal Team: Northwest Immigrant Rights Project (Seattle) 8. OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates v. Rubio (1:25-cv-00287) U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia File Date: January 30, 2025 Plaintiff: OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates Legal Team: Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP and Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC 9. County of Santa Clara v. Trump (5:25-cv-00981) U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California File Date: January 30, 2025 Plaintiff: County of Santa Clara New York Immigration Coalition v. Trump et al. (1:25-cv-01309) U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York File Date: February 13, 2025 Plaintiff: J.V. and New York Immigration Coalition Barbara v. Trump (1:25-cv-00244) U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire File Date: June 27, 2025 Plaintiff: Barbara, Immigration Law Reform Institute, Mark, Matthew, Sarah, Susan Legal Team: ACLU, Asian Law Caucus, NAACP Legal and Defense Education Fund, State Democracy Defenders Action Major Developments 2025/07/16 6. CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) Judge Boardman issued a memorandum opinion and an indicative ruling granting a class-wide injunction pending the district court acquiring jurisdiction on remand from the Fourth Circuit where this part of the litigation is still on appeal. 2025/07/10 11. Barbara v. Trump (1:25-cv-00244) Judge Laplante granted a seven-day classwide injunction preventing the administration from enforcing Executive Order 14160. 2025/07/10 1. New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Trump (1:25-cv00038) Judge Joseph N. Laplante issued an injunction blocking Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship, ruling that the Plaintiffs could proceed as a class. 2025/07/03 5. State of New Jersey v. Trump (1:25-cv-10139) The FIrst CIrcuit denied the government’s request for a supplementary briefing on the state of the preliminary injunction granted previously and remanded the case to the lower court to consider whether Trump v. CASA impacts the court’s preliminary injunction. 2025/07/02 10. New York Immigration Coalition v. Trump et al. (1:25-cv-01309) Plaintiffs submitted a letter indicating that they would amend their complaint following the Supreme Court ruling on June 27, 2025. 2025/07/01 8. OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates v. Rubio (1:25-cv-00287) OCA filed an amended complaint which included several co-complaintant prospective mothers proceeding anonymously and which updated the complaint with statements and actions taken by the Trump administration since the initial complaint was filed. On July 2, the OCA moved for partial summary judgement to declare the EO unconstitutional and to enjoin the administration from carrying it out. 2025/06/27 6. CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint , which included additional plaintiffs and removed President Donald Trump as a defendant while adding the Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) as a defendant. 2025/06/27 6. CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to partially stay a lower court injunction against Executive Order 14160. The ruling limits the injunction’s scope to only the litigants in the case, but left open whether broader relief might be permitted in class actions. 2025/04/11 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) 208 House Democrats filed amicus brief against Trump birthright citizenship executive order with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Case Number 25-807 2025/04/11 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) AALDEF and coalition filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Case Number 25-807 2025/04/09 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) NAPABA and coalition filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Case Number 25-807 2025/04/04 5. State of New Jersey v. Trump (1:25-cv-10139) The Plaintiffs filed an amicus brief with Supreme Court Case Number 24A886 2025/04/04 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) The Plaintiffs filed an amicus brief with Supreme Court Case Number 24A885 2025/04/04 6. CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) The plaintiffs filed an amicus brief with Supreme Court Case Number 24A884. 2025/03/13 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) The government appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court for a partial stay after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied its request for a partial stay of the district court's injunction. 2025/03/13 6. CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) The government appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court for a partial stay after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied its request for a partial stay of the district court's injunction. 2025/03/11 5. State of New Jersey v. Trump (1:25-cv-10139) The First Circuit Court of Appeals denied the government’s motion for a stay. The government appealed to the Supreme Court. 2025/02/19 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) The Ninth Circuit issued an order denying the government’s emergency motion to stay the district court’s injunction and leaving the existing briefing schedule unchanged. 2025/02/13 5. State of New Jersey v. Trump (1:25-cv-10139) Judge Leo T. Sorokin issued an opinion granting a preliminary injunction enjoining the government from implementing and enforcing Executive Order No. 14,160. 2025/02/13 2. Doe v. Trump (1:25-cv-10136) Judge Leo T. Sorokin issued an opinion granting a preliminary injunction enjoining the government from implementing and enforcing Executive Order No. 14,160. 2025/02/10 1. New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Trump (1:25-cv00038) U.S. District Judge Joseph N. Laplante issued a preliminary injunction . 2025/02/05 6. CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) U.S. District Court Judge Deborah L. Boardman issued a preliminary nationwide injunction until the case is resolved or a higher court overturns it. 2025/01/27 7. Franco Aleman v. Trump (2:25-cv-00163) This case was terminated and consolidated into 3. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) 2025/01/23 4. State of Washington et al v. Trump et al (2:25-cv00127) U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour granted a temporary restraining order, halting the enforcement of the executive order for 14 days. He described the order as "blatantly unconstitutional," emphasizing its immediate and irreparable harm to individuals affected. Back to Table of Contents Summary The legal victory of Wong Kim Ark and the struggles of Japanese Americans during internment illustrate the enduring importance of protecting birthright citizenship. Defending this right ensures the United States remains a nation of equality and justice. Let’s learn from history, honor constitutional principles, and secure a future where all are treated with dignity and fairness. Back to Table of Contents Timeline Contents Birthright Citizenship Select Title

Newsletter - #333 Hate Crime Victim Speaks; Trump on Harvard/Funding Cuts/Litigations; Meng/Hirono Bill+ #333 Hate Crime Victim Speaks; Trump on Harvard/Funding Cuts/Litigations; Meng/Hirono Bill+ In This Issue #333 · Hate Crime Victim to Speak at 2025/06/02 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Trump Revokes Harvard’s Authority to Enroll International Students · U.S. Science Faces Crisis Amid Deep Federal Funding Cuts · Latest on Litigations Against Trump's Executive Actions · Meng, Hirono Introduce Legislation to Promote the Teaching of AANHPI History in Schools · News and Activities for the Communities Hate Crime Victim to Speak at 2025/06/02 APA Justice Monthly Meeting According to AsAmNews , BlackNews , KABC , LA Times , Washington Post , and multiple media reports, Aki Maehara , a 71-year-old Japanese American professor and Vietnam War veteran, was struck by a speeding vehicle on April 29, 2025, while riding his electric bicycle near his home in a suburb of Los Angeles. Moments before the crash, Maehara says he heard racial slurs directed at him. The case is now under investigation by the Montebello Police Department as a possible hate crime.Maehara, a longtime professor of Asian American history at East Los Angeles College (ELAC), sustained serious injuries in the attack. He suffered a concussion, fractured cheekbone, deep arm lacerations, and trauma to his hips, lower back, and neck. His electric bike was destroyed in the collision. But what shocked him even more than the physical pain were the words he heard before and after the attack.“I heard, ‘ f**** c***k,’ and I got hit,” Maehara told Eyewitness News. “My bike and I were thrown down. As soon as I hit that row of bricks, I heard the guy say, ‘Go back to f**** c***k land,’ and then he drove away.” “I wear a full-face helmet with a glare visor,” Maehara said. “There’s no way anybody could see my face. So how the hell did he know I’m Asian?”The motive behind the attack appears deeply personal. Maehara is no stranger to harassment. Over the course of his teaching career, which has included courses on the history of racism in the United States and the Vietnam War, he has faced intimidation and threats. He recounted multiple incidents, including classroom protests by Chicano Republicans and even a visit from Ku Klux Klan members during his tenure at Cal State Long Beach.Despite his injuries and the trauma of the attack, Maehara refused to retreat from the classroom. Just weeks after being hospitalized, he returned to teach his final classes of the semester. “It was important for me to show up because they’re trying to stop me,” he said.Friends, former students, and community members have rallied around him in the wake of the attack. Glorya Cabrera , a longtime friend, launched a GoFundMe campaign to help pay for his recovery expenses, including additional in-home care beyond what the VA hospital is currently providing. Community leaders have called for greater awareness and systemic change. “This isn’t just about one man on a bike,” said a spokesperson from the Stop AAPI Hate coalition. “It’s about decades of racism, invisibility, and a failure to protect our communities. Mr. Maehara’s story is one of courage, but also a wake-up call.”Maehara’s attack is yet another stark reminder that anti-Asian hate remains an ongoing battle and underscores the vulnerability that many AAPI individuals feel in their daily lives.Professor Aki Maehara, along with community leaders, has accepted the invitation to speak on the incicent at the APA Justice monthly meeting on June 2, 2025. 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 . Trump Revokes Harvard’s Authority to Enroll International Students According to CNN , New York Times , Reuters , The Hill , and multiple media reports, in a dramatic escalation of its ongoing confrontation with Harvard University, the Trump administration on May 22, 2025, revoked the school’s ability to enroll international students—striking a major blow to one of the university’s most important sources of funding and global prestige.The decision, conveyed in a letter from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem , is part of a broader federal investigation into Harvard’s compliance with immigration and education policies. The move follows tense exchanges between the university and the Department of Homeland Security over the legality of a sweeping request for records related to the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP).The revocation means that Harvard can no longer admit international students and that current international students must transfer or risk losing their legal status in the United States. The university, which has around 6,800 international students—roughly 27% of its student body—is expected to challenge the move in court. It would be the second legal confrontation between Harvard and the Trump administration in recent weeks. Last month, the university sued the federal government over what it described as unconstitutional attempts to alter its curriculum, admissions policies, and hiring practices.The financial impact of the decision is likely to be significant. With tuition alone approaching $60,000 a year—and total costs nearing $87,000—international students often pay a substantial share of their education expenses, making them a key revenue source.Harvard said the move by the Trump administration was illegal and amounted to retaliation. Harvard rejected the allegations and pledged to support foreign students. The government’s action is unlawful," the university said in a statement. "This retaliatory action threatens serious harm to the Harvard community and our country, and undermines Harvard’s academic and research mission.” The university said it was "fully committed" to educating foreign students and was working on producing guidance for affected students. U.S. Science Faces Crisis Amid Deep Federal Funding Cuts According to reports by the New York Times on May 21 and May 22 , 2025, respectively, a deepening funding crisis is shaking the foundation of U.S. scientific research, with the Trump administration imposing sweeping cuts across key institutions, including Harvard University and the National Science Foundation (NSF). The result is a dramatic slowdown in research activity, jeopardizing America’s innovation pipeline and scientific leadership.At the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, the situation is especially severe. Following accusations from federal officials that the school promotes “amorphous equity objectives” and fosters antisemitism, the administration froze federal grants—cutting off a vital lifeline that constitutes nearly 60% of the school’s revenue. More than 130 researchers had their funding abruptly canceled, threatening major studies on ALS, tuberculosis, and multiple sclerosis. Faculty describe the emergency response—cutting programs, ending leases, and training staff in private fundraising—as “all-consuming.” With many scientists considering offers from institutions in Europe and China, administrators fear a permanent brain drain. Simultaneously, the NSF is issuing new grants at the slowest rate in at least 35 years. As of May 21, only $989 million in grants had been awarded for 2025—down 51% from the average of the past decade. The slowdown is hitting virtually every scientific field, including computer science, biology, climate research, and STEM education. Compounding the problem, more than 1,600 active NSF research projects have beenterminated, eliminating around $1.5 billion in previously approved funding.While the administration argues that elite universities like Harvard should rely on their own endowments and that NSF funds must align with conservative priorities, critics warn these ideologically driven cuts threaten the nation’s scientific infrastructure. Economists caution that reduced research investment could have long-term consequences on economic growth, innovation, and global competitiveness. Latest on Litigations Against Trump's Executive Actions As of April 29, 2025, the second Trump Administration has issued 142 executive orders, exceeding the record of 99 set during President Franklin D. Roosevelt 's first term, according to a May 16, 2025, Congressional Research Service (CRS) report . This surge in executive actions has sparked court challenges and injunctions. As of May 21, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trum p's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 246 (8 closed cases). As of May 21, 2025, the New York Times reported at least 165 of the court rulings have at least temporarily paused some of the Trump administration initiatives due to concerns over presidential authority, constitutional violations, or federal statute infringements. The CRS report identified 25 cases in which district courts had issued nationwide injunctions. Nationwide injunctions are court orders against the government that prevent the government from implementing a challenged law, regulation, or other policy against all relevant persons and entities, whether or not such persons or entities are parties participating in the litigation. Commentators, judges, lawmakers, and executive branch officials debate whether and when it is appropriate for a court to enjoin a government action in its entirety, with some arguing that nationwide injunctions are rarely or never appropriate, while others defend the practice.They 25 nationwide injunctions covered by CRS include: · 10 on federal funding · 3 on birthright citizenship · 2 each on federal agencies, federal employment, immigration, information disclosure, and military service · 1 each on DEI and elections. CRS categorized cases by subject matter manually. While some cases raised multiple legal and policy issues and could potentially be classified in multiple subject areas, CRS selected one primary issue area per case for ease of analysis. National Injunction from terminating the immigration status of foreign students According to the Washington Post on May 23, 2025, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White of the Northern District of California blocked the Trump administration from terminating the immigration status of foreign students, granting nationwide relief to thousands of students caught in the crosshairs of the administration’s crackdown on alleged antisemitism on college campuses. The Trump administration “likely exceeded their authority and acted arbitrarily and capriciously” when officials terminated the legal status of students in a database overseen by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Judge White wrote. “The relief the Court grants provides Plaintiffs with a measure of stability and certainty that they will be able to continue their studies or their employment without the threat of re-termination hanging over their heads.”While many courts have granted relief to individuals suing the administration, the judge’s order effectively bars the federal government from arresting, incarcerating or transferring students in these cases and all other individuals nationwide while similar cases are still pending. Injunction Against Dismantling Department of Education According to Reuters on May 23, 2025, U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston issued an injunction blocking the department from moving forward with a mass termination announced in March of over 1,300 employees, which would cut its staff by half. "The record abundantly reveals that defendants' true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute," wrote Joun. "This court cannot be asked to cover its eyes while the department's employees are continuously fired and units are transferred out until the department becomes a shell of itself," the judge wrote. He ordered the administration to not just reinstate the workers but also to halt implementation of Trump's March 21 directive to transfer student loans and special needs programs to other federal agencies.The Trump administration has appealed the decision. Meng, Hirono Introduce Legislation to Promote the Teaching of AANHPI History in Schools On May 22, 2025, U.S. Representative Grace Meng (D-NY), Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), and U.S. Senator Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) introduced the Teaching Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander History Act , bicameral legislation to promote the teaching of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) history in schools across the country. Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders have made and continue to make immeasurable contributions to our nation, including in sports, arts, government, science, business, and military service. However, the K-12 education system and social studies textbooks have poorly represented how AANHPIs have played pivotal roles in shaping America for the better. In a recent survey , 42% of respondents were unable to name a famous Asian American, and 42% were unable to name a famous Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. The Teaching AANHPI History Act requires Presidential and Congressional Academies’ grant applicants and recipients to include Asian American, Pacific Islander, and Native Hawaiian history as part of their American history and civics programs offered to students and teachers. Every year, hundreds of teachers and students attend these academies, which are funded by the U.S. Department of Education, for an in-depth study of American history and civics. The bill would also encourage the inclusion of AANHPI history within national and state tests administered through the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and promote collaboration with the Smithsonian Institution’s Asian Pacific American Center to develop innovative programming. APA Justice is among the many organizations that have endorsed the Meng-Hirono legislation.Read the CAPAC press release: https://bit.ly/43JYFEs . Read the full text of the legislation: https://bit.ly/4myhBxG . News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2025/05/22 Serica 2025 Trailblazers Conference & Gala2025/05/29 U.S. v. Wen Ho Lee - 25 Years Later2025/06/01 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/06/02 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/06/03 The Second Annual State of the Science Address2025/06/15 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/06/15-18 2025 Applied Statistics Symposium2025/06/16-24 Discover China 2025: Summer Youth Exchange to the Greater Bay AreaVisit 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 May 23, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #4 China's Talent Program & U.S. Research Discrimination; Ad Council Event; 2020 Census #4 China's Talent Program & U.S. Research Discrimination; Ad Council Event; 2020 Census Back View PDF July 20, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #274 Alien Land Laws; 08/05 Meeting Summary; US-China Agreement; Hate Incidents in NYC; + #274 Alien Land Laws; 08/05 Meeting Summary; US-China Agreement; Hate Incidents in NYC; + In This Issue #274 · Present and Historical Impacts of Alien Land laws · Summary of August 2024 Monthly Meeting Posted · FT : China-US Tensions Erode Co-operation on Science and Tech · Two Unsettling Anti-Asian Hate Incidents in NYC · News and Activities for the Communities Present and Historical Impacts of Alien Land laws According to NBC News on August 19, 2024, Wen Raiti , a long-time Republican and small business owner in Jacksonville, Florida, switched her party affiliation to Democrat after Governor Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill (SB) 264, which bans Chinese citizens from purchasing property in Florida. For Raiti, the law was the “last straw” after all the hostile rhetoric and scapegoating that Republicans have directed at Asian Americans during the Covid-19 pandemic. “It’s in our Constitution to treat everyone with equality and justice so that everyone can live here without fear,” she said. “The Republican Party has abandoned these principles.” “This bill alone helped activate a lot of people in the Chinese American community who historically are not engaged with the government, especially the state government,” said state Rep. Anna Eskamani (D-Orlando), who has been an outspoken critic of SB 264.The alien land law, which has angered the Chinese American community, has led to increased political engagement and voter mobilization among Chinese Americans, particularly in the lead-up to Florida's August 20 primary. The bill has been seen as discriminatory, drawing comparisons to historical anti-Asian land laws, and has pushed some conservatives to defect from the GOP.The Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA) has been actively working to educate and mobilize voters, with many in the community now more involved in the electoral process. “After the law passed, we realized that Asian Americans really have no voice,” said Echo King , president of FAAJA, a nonprofit organization that was established last year to fight anti-Asian discrimination. “We’re contributing to this country, so why are we being targeted?” Legal experts compared SB 264 to century-old alien land laws that barred Asian Americans from owning land; Florida was one of the last states to repeal its law, in 2018. Chinese American conservatives have also been subjected to rampant anti-communism, or Red Scare tactics. In June, Bowen Kou , a Republican candidate in a state Senate race, sued Senate Republicans over attack ads that claimed he accepted contributions from Chinese donors linked to the Communist Party. In April, a federal appeals court heard a challenge to the law after four Chinese immigrants in Florida, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union and other civil rights groups, sued the state last summer. Advocates say they are hoping for an injunction ruling. The Justice Department supported the Chinese plaintiffs in a filing last June.Read the NBC News report: https://nbcnews.to/3yO5EzH On August 12, 2024, UCLA Professor Paul Ong and two co-authors at the UCLA Center for Neighborhood Knowledge published a paper titled "Lessons from California's Historical Alien Land Law: Racial Xenophobia and Homeownership." According to the paper, Florida enacted a controversial law known as SB 264 to prohibit foreigners from purchasing real estate, ostensibly for national security reasons. However, this legislation disproportionately targets individuals from Asian countries and risks creating a chilling effect on all Asians. Similar laws passed by other states echo this trend, unfortunately mirroring historical patterns of discrimination. The efforts, however, are not the first efforts targeting Asians. California and other states enacted alien land laws during the first half of the twentieth century. Rooted in deep-seated anti-Asian sentiments and hostilities, particularly directed at Japanese Americans, these laws combined a toxic blend of racism and xenophobia, further marginalizing Asians socially, politically, and economically. While instigated by the anti-Japanese movement, California’s law broadly applied to all aliens ineligible for citizenship -- a category exclusively encompassing Asians.A direct consequence of California’s law was an extremely low homeownership rate among Asians, far below that of other major racial and ethnic groups from 1910 to 1940. Ownership increased as some Asians found ways to circumvent the unfair law and as the number of U.S.-born Asians grew; nonetheless the rate remained significantly lower than that of non-Hispanic whites (NHW). Even after controlling for income, nativity and other factors, Asians were still several times less likely to own homes compared to NHW in 1940.While overt anti-Asian sentiment may be less intense today, Asian Americans continue to face discriminatory treatment, as evidenced by the surge in anti-Asian hate crimes during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This animus often stems from the perception of Asians as perpetual foreigners, exacerbated by rising global tensions with Asian nations. While the current wave of alien land laws may not explicitly target Asians, they have the potential to harm Asian Americans by restricting property ownership rights and fueling anti-Asian rhetoric.Read the report: https://bit.ly/3AsgDzc Summary of August 2024 Monthly Meeting Posted The August 2024 APA Justice monthly meeting summary has been posted at https://bit.ly/3AHFSO1 . We thank the following speakers for their reports and updates: · Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC). Casey Lee , Policy Director for CAPAC, provided an update on recent activities, thanking Professor Franklin Tao and his wife for participating in a press conference celebrating their recent victory. CAPAC remains committed to supporting Professor Franklin Tao’s reinstatement at the University of Kansas. Casey also highlighted CAPAC’s efforts to remove the China Initiative language from the House Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations bill, which passed out of committee in July but was not considered by the full House before recess. CAPAC will collaborate with lawmakers and advocacy groups to ensure the provision is excluded from the final bill. · Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC. Joanna voiced strong support for Casey's remarks and highlighted Advancing Justice | AAJC's efforts to oppose the reinstatement of the China Initiative, particularly focusing on language in the House's Commerce and Justice Appropriations report. Fortunately, the Senate version lacks this language, offering hope for a positive outcome in conference discussions. AAJC is closely collaborating with CAPAC and other allies to monitor developments. They are also tracking the Department of Treasury’s proposed rulemaking related to CFIUS and may submit comments to ensure protections against national origin discrimination. Additionally, AAJC is coordinating with coalition partners to align their advocacy efforts and recently held a press briefing celebrating Professor Tao’s legal victory. Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF). Gisela reported that AASF has been actively working with allies on policy impacts while fostering community engagement. The inaugural Asian American Pioneer Medal Symposium and Ceremony, held in partnership with Stanford University's Asian American Activity Center, was a resounding success, drawing over 1,300 attendees. The event featured prominent figures in AI, life sciences, and leadership, including Nobel and Turing Award laureates, with participation from industry leaders and academic figures like Stanford University President John Levin. The symposium highlighted the contributions of Asian Americans, aligning with AASF's broader civil rights efforts. AASF's high school competition, which encouraged students to create videos about medal recipients, further promoted understanding of Asian American history. AASF remains committed to supporting Dr. Franklin Tao and continues to collaborate with civil rights partners to ensure Asian American perspectives are represented in federal policymaking. Membership is now open to all scholars who support AASF's mission. Anne S. Chao , Co-founder, Friends of the National Asian Pacific American Museum; Program Manager, Houston Asian American Archive (HAAA), Rice University. Anne S. Chao co-founded HAAA, recognizing the lack of records documenting Asian American lives in one of the most diverse cities in the U.S. Over the past 15 years, HAAA has grown to include around 500 interviews, various awards, performances, and exhibits, capturing the multifaceted lives of Asian Americans in the Greater Houston area. The archive includes interviews with notable figures such as Judge Theresa Chang, astronaut Leroy Chiao, and renowned physicist Paul Chu, among others. Anne shared the story of the Gee family's contributions to Houston, with plans for a book and curriculum on their legacy. On the national level, Anne highlighted the need for an Asian Pacific American Museum on the National Mall, noting the absence of such a museum despite existing museums for African Americans, Latinos, and women. Although Congress passed H.R. 3525 in 2021 to study the feasibility of creating an Asian Pacific American Museum, the commission cannot start work until all eight commissioner positions are filled. To advance this effort, Anne co-founded the Friends of the National Asian Pacific American Museum, aiming to mobilize support, fundraising, and coordination to fast-track the museum's establishment. The organization is engaging museum experts and academics nationwide to contribute to the museum's development. · Franklin Tao 陶丰 , former Professor of Kansas University, Victim of China Initiative; Hong Peng 彭鸿 , Wife of Professor Tao. Professor Tao shared an emotional account of his five-year ordeal, beginning with his arrest under the China Initiative in 2019, based on false accusations. Despite being acquitted of all charges by the 10th Circuit Court, the experience has devastated his life and career, costing him nearly everything, including his position at Kansas University (KU), which terminated him in breach of an agreement. Tao and his wife, Hong Peng, faced immense financial and emotional strain, borrowing heavily and nearly going bankrupt, while Hong worked multiple jobs to support their family. Their children also suffered, with trauma from FBI surveillance and the overall impact of the situation. In the past few years while he was fighting his case, Professor Tao published 30 papers and retained the capability of working as a faculty member. Hong Peng echoed her husband’s account, detailing the intense hardship they endured, including the toll on their children's mental health. She worked tirelessly to keep the family afloat, all while watching Franklin struggle with depression. The family's suffering was compounded by the immense legal and financial burdens they carried. Despite the challenges, justice was ultimately served with Franklin's acquittal, and they remain hopeful that KU will reinstate him, allowing them to rebuild their lives. Both Franklin and Hong expressed deep gratitude for the support they received from their community, legal team, and various organizations, which played a crucial role in achieving this victory. · Ron Barrett-Gonzalez , Committee A Co-Chair, Kansas Conference of the American Association of University Professors (KCAAUP); and Rob Catlett , Committee A C-Chair, KCAAUP. The AAUP is a state-wide body representing over 400 faculty members from various higher education institutions across Kansas. The Conference, led by volunteer officers, addresses issues such as due process denial, governance, and tenure disputes. Recently, Kansas University (KU) Professor Ron Barrett-Gonzalez and Emporia State University Professor Rob Catlett met with a KU administrator to advocate for the reinstatement of Dr. Franklin Tao. Ron and Rob approached the meeting with a strategy focused on persuading the KU administration to reinstate Dr. Tao quietly but effectively, emphasizing the ethical and legal imperative to correct this wrong. They outlined a plan to reinstate Dr. Tao during a time when national attention would be elsewhere, offering KU an opportunity to rectify the situation without significant public backlash. The administrator seemed receptive, taking detailed notes and promising a response by August 19. If KU does not act, the newly formed KU Faculty Union, supported by 87% of voters, could escalate the issue, potentially turning it into a rallying cause, attracting media attention, and strengthening the union's influence. Ron and Rob remain hopeful, given their past successes with the same administrator, that justice will prevail, and Dr. Tao will be reinstated. Read the August APA Justice monthly meeting summary: https://bit.ly/3AHFSO1 . Read previous monthly meeting summaries: https://bit.ly/3kxkqxP FT : China-US Tensions Erode Co-operation on Science and Tech According to the Financial Times on August 19, 2024, rising tensions between the US and China threaten to sever a 45-year-old science and technology pact due for renewal later this month, hindering the superpowers’ collaboration in critical areas. The science and technology agreement between the U.S. and China, originally signed in 1979, has been a significant framework for bilateral cooperation in various fields like energy, agriculture, and disaster management. However, renewing this agreement has become increasingly difficult due to escalating geopolitical tensions, including U.S. concerns over China's access to sensitive technologies and issues related to intellectual property and espionage. Although researchers advocate for continued collaboration in areas like climate change and AI safety, the strained political climate, especially in the lead-up to the U.S. presidential election, complicates the prospects of a long-term extension. The potential cancellation of the accord could have a chilling effect on future joint research projects and academic collaborations, underscoring the importance of maintaining ties between researchers to address global challenges.The agreement expired in August 2023. It has been extended temporarily for six months twice. The current extension expires on August 27, 2024.Read the Financial Times report: https://on.ft.com/4dR8Tp4 . Two Unsettling Anti-Asian Hate Incidents in NYC Two unsettling incidents involving racially motivated attacks against Asian Americans occurred in New York City in recent months, highlighting concerns about racism, bigotry, and anti-Asian hate, as well as the work to fight against them still has a long way to go. Shiva Rajgopal , an Indian descent and Kester and Byrnes Professor at Columbia Business School, published a post on his LinkedIn account, sharing the disturbing attack that he suffered on August 19, 2024.“Completely unprovoked, a well toned white male with a red mountain bike slaps me on the face on 112th and Broadway. My glasses go flying. Then he goes on to hurl racial epithets:‘ you think I am afraid of you lot. You f..ing Indians.’ Another white person comes to my rescue. And I just ran like hell,” wrote Rajgopal.Rajgopal was rattled by what he had experienced. He said this was the first time that he had suffered explicit racial abuse in his 32 years in the United States. “No wonder so many of my colleagues are leaving the upper west side of New York City for the suburbs,” Rajgopal concluded.In a separate case, Ben Chang , a Columbia University spokesperson and vice president for communications, was assaulted near campus by a man who struck him with a metal water bottle and yelled xenophobic remarks. Despite attempting to avoid the confrontation, Chang was pursued by the attacker until he managed to alert a public safety officer. Chang, who was born and raised in the U.S., found the experience jarring and emphasized the importance of reporting such attacks to prevent them in the future. These incidents reflect continuing concerns about anti-Asian racial tensions and violence in New York City. Amid the pandemic and its aftermath, a number of high-profile, unsettled, anti-Asian hate crimes and incidents happened in New York City. It is unclear what motivated the attacker to assault Rajgopal. It is worthwhile to note that Indian Americans have risen quickly in the nation’s political arena. Democratic party's presidential nominee, Kamala Harris , has a mother of Indian descent. And Republican vice-presidential nominee JD Vance ’s wife Usha Vance is also an Indian American. Juan Zhang , editor at US-China Perception Monitor, contributed this report. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/09/01 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/09/09 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/09/19 1990 Teachers Workshop: Asian American Identity2024/09/19-20 AANHPI Unity Summit2024/1002 C100: Asian American Career Ceiling Initiative2024/10/06 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/10/07 APA Justice Monthly MeetingThe Community Calendar has moved. Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. New Research Prize: Chen Institute and Science Prize for AI Accelerated Research The Chen Institute and Science launched the "Chen Institute and Science Prize for AI Accelerated Research" in August 2024. This initiative aims to drive advancements in artificial intelligence that can expand scientific research. Young scientists from around the world are invited to submit AI-driven projects that demonstrate significant potential to improve research and lives. The competition will award a Grand Prize of $30,000, with the winner's essay published in Science and an accompanying five-year AAAS membership. Additionally, up to two runners-up will receive $10,000 each, with their essays published on Science Online and the same membership benefits, promoting sustained engagement with scientific progress.Deadline for application is December 13, 2024. For more information and apply for the prize, visit https://bit.ly/3WRwDCB Back View PDF August 22, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #20 10/05 Monthly Meeting; WSJ Report On The Tao Case; UMich Webinar #20 10/05 Monthly Meeting; WSJ Report On The Tao Case; UMich Webinar Back View PDF October 2, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Privacy Policy The owners of this website ("us" or "we" or "APA Justice") value the protection of individual privacy. This document sets forth our online privacy policy ("privacy policy") for the website www.apajustice.org ("Site"). By using the Site, you the user ("you") indicate that you have read and agree to be bound by this privacy policy. If you do not agree to this privacy policy, do not use the Site in any manner. This privacy policy does not govern privacy practices associated with offline activities. Thank you for visiting the Site. We are committed to the privacy of our visitors. We collect no personal information about you when you visit the Site unless you choose to provide that information to us and we do not use personal information other than to process your request that required you to submit personal information. We do not make any visitor-provided information available to third parties. Last updated: December 25, 2018 Information collected and stored automatically If you do nothing during your visit but browse through the Site, read pages, or download information, we will gather and store certain information about your visit automatically. This information does not identify you personally. We automatically collect and store information concerning your visit. Information you voluntarily provide If you provide us with personally identifiable information, for example, by sending an e-mail or by filling out a form and submitting it through the Site, we use that information to respond to your message and to help us provide you with the information and services that you request. All uses of that information are described on the web page containing the form. Submitting voluntary information constitutes your consent to the use of the information for the stated purpose. When you click the "Submit" button on any of the web forms found on the Site, you are indicating your voluntary consent for us to use of the information you submit for the purpose stated. Links to other sites The Site contains links to various other private and public organizations. Once you link to another website, you are then subject to the privacy policies of the new website. We cannot control nor are we responsible for any such third party collection or use of your personal information. It is always a good idea to read the Privacy Policy of any website you visit. Children under 13 The Site is a general audience site which is neither designed nor intended to collect personal information from children who are under the age of 13. In order to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, children under the age of 13 should not provide any personal information to the Site. Security We use commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that any information you give to us is stored and maintained in a secure environment. Cookies We may use cookies from time to time to allow us to automate access and the data entry functions of the Site such as to tailor the Site to your preferences or interests, customize promotions or marketing, or identify which areas of the Site are more popular. A cookie is a small, unique text file that a website can send to your computer hard drive when you visit that site. We do not make any cookie information available to third parties. Most web browsers can either alert you to the use of cookies or refuse to accept cookies entirely. If you do not want us to deploy cookies in your browser, you can set your browser to reject cookies or to notify you when a website tries to put a cookie on your computer. Rejecting cookies may affect your ability to use of some of the products and/or services at the Site. Privacy Policy Changes: We reserve the right to change this privacy policy at any time at its sole discretion and without notice to you. All privacy policy changes are effective immediately. Your continued use of the Site following any privacy policy changes will mean you accept those changes. Contact If you have difficulty obtaining information from the Site, please contact us to get the material in another format. You should provide the URL of the site referencing that information. If you have any comments, or suggestions for improvement, please contact us at contact@apajustice.org . Terms of Service

Newsletter - #22 ARPP Webpage; Lost Students Or Inept Spies; Tao And Lieber Cases; Media Reports #22 ARPP Webpage; Lost Students Or Inept Spies; Tao And Lieber Cases; Media Reports Back View PDF October 13, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #192: BREAKING NEWS: DOJ Files Brief in Florida Lawsuit; 07/03 Meeting; Who Can Be American #192: BREAKING NEWS: DOJ Files Brief in Florida Lawsuit; 07/03 Meeting; Who Can Be American In This Issue #192 BREAKING NEWS: DOJ Files Amicus Brief in Florida Alien Land Lawsuit 2023/07/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting How Frederick Douglass and Wong Kim Ark Helped Define Who Can Be American BREAKING NEWS: DOJ Files Amicus Brief in Florida Alien Land Lawsuit On June 27, 2023, attorneys for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a statement of interest in support of the motion for preliminary injunction: https://bit.ly/3PsKSvw The 22-page statement, also called an amicus curiae *“friend-of-the-court”) brief, begins with this introduction:"The State of Florida recently enacted a statute that imposes new prohibitions on owning or purchasing land in the State. Among other provisions, Senate Bill 264 (“SB 264”) prohibits individuals who are not U.S. citizens or permanent residents and whose “domicile” is in China, or other so-called “foreign countries of concern,” from owning or purchasing real property. The United States respectfully submits this Statement of Interest under 28 U.S.C. § 5171 to advise the Court of the United States’ view that the provisions of SB 264 to be codified at Florida Statutes §§ 692.201–.2052 violate the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. These unlawful provisions will cause serious harm to people simply because of their national origin, contravene federal civil rights laws, undermine constitutional rights, and will not advance the State’s purported goal of increasing public safety. Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of these claims challenging the provisions of SB 264 that restrict and prohibit land ownership. Accordingly, the United States supports Plaintiffs’ motion to enjoin Defendants from implementing and enforcing these provisions."The brief proceeds to explain these two arguments: Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their Fair Housing Act Claims Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their Equal Protection Claim The brief concludes:"For the foregoing reasons, the provisions of SB 264 that restrict and prohibit land ownership violate the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of those claims."Read the DOJ amicus curiae brief: https://bit.ly/3PsKSvw 2023/07/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, July 3, 2023, starting at 1:55 pm ET.In addition to updates by Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC); John Yang 杨重远 , President and Executive Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC; and Gisela Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), speakers will include: Al Green , Member of U.S. House of Representatives; Member, Executive Board and Chair of Housing Task Force, CAPAC, on alien land bills and multicultural advocacy coalition Clay Zhu 朱可亮 , Partner, DeHeng Law Offices 德恒律师事务所; Founder, Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance 华美维权同盟, on the recent developments of the Florida lawsuit Scott Chang , Senior Counsel, National Fair Housing Alliance, on NFHA and its work on alien land bills Edgar Chen , Special Policy Advisor, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, on NAPABA's work on alien land bills and related activities Cindy Tsai , Interim President and Executive Director, Committee of 100, on the recent roles and activities of C100 The virtual monthly meeting is by invitation only. 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 . How Frederick Douglass and Wong Kim Ark Helped Define Who Can Be American During a recent roundtable with state organizers and activists on alien land laws and related issues, Helen Zia 谢汉兰 shared a picture of Wong Kim Ark 黃金德 and Frederick Douglas - it is a story of Asian Americans and solidarity that is missing in American history.According to a KCET report on May 19, 2022, Frederick Douglass escaped slavery and was a powerful voice for racial justice. In his view, the struggle for equality of the Black man also meant a fight for equality for all people. "… I want the Asiatic to find a home here in the United States, and feel at home here, both for his sake and ours. Right wrongs no man," he said in Boston in December 1869. Wong Kim Ark, who was born in the United States and barred from re-entry in 1895, took his case to the US Supreme Court and won, paving the way for birthright citizenship for all."I am especially to speak to you of the character and mission of the United States, with special reference to the question whether we are the better or the worse for being composed of different races of men. I propose to consider first, what we are, second, what we are likely to be, and, thirdly, what we ought to be," Douglas said in his speech. "There are such things in the world as human rights. They rest upon no conventional foundation, but are external, universal, and indestructible. Among these, is the right of locomotion; the right of migration; the right which belongs to no particular race, but belongs alike to all and to all alike. It is the right you assert by staying here, and your fathers asserted by coming here. It is this great right that I assert for the Chinese and Japanese, and for all other varieties of men equally with yourselves, now and forever. I know of no rights of race superior to the rights of humanity, and when there is a supposed conflict between human and national rights."According to Wikipedia , Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco, California, at 751 Sacramento Street. In November 1894, Wong sailed to China for a temporary visit, to rejoin his wife at his family's village in Taishan, Guangdong. But when he returned in August 1895, he was detained at the Port of San Francisco by the Collector of Customs, who denied him permission to enter the country, arguing that Wong was not a U.S. citizen despite his having been born in the U.S., but was instead a Chinese subject because his parents were Chinese. Wong was confined for five months on steamships off the coast of San Francisco while his case was being tried. In a 6–2 decision issued on March 28, 1898, the Supreme Court held that Wong Kim Ark had acquired U.S. citizenship at birth and that "the American citizenship which Wong Kim Ark acquired by birth within the United States has not been lost or taken away by anything happening since his birth." Back View PDF June 28, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #189: Registrations Open! Xiaoxing Xi; Hoover: A Fresh Start From What? Alien Land Bills; More #189: Registrations Open! Xiaoxing Xi; Hoover: A Fresh Start From What? Alien Land Bills; More In This Issue #189 Register Now: June 26 Webinar on Stop Warrantless Surveillance Register Now: July 6 President's Advisory Commission on AAPI Public Meeting Eight Years After False Accusation, Xiaoxing Xi Can Sue FBI Hoover Institution Webinar: A Fresh Start from What? Latest on Discriminatory Alien Land Bills News and Activities for the Communities Register Now: June 26 Webinar on Stop 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 "Stop Warrantless Surveillance: The Danger of Reauthorizing Section 702 of FISA". 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. They include Temple University Professor Xiaoxing Xi 郗小星 and possibly New York Police Department Officer Baimadajie Angwang 昂旺 . 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 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 Moderator. Lillian Sing 郭丽莲 . Judge (retired), California Superior Court; first Asian American woman judge in Northern California REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/42AbNIF 1. Cato Institute Policy Forum on Section 702 of FISA According to a Cato Institute online policy forum on June 6, 2023, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) will expire on New Year’s Eve 2023 absent congressional action to renew it. This controversial surveillance power was enacted in 2008 following over two years of debate in Congress after its secret, illegal predecessor— the National Security Agency’s Stellar Wind mass electronic surveillance program—was exposed by the New York Times in December 2005. Since that time, Section 702 has been renewed twice—once under President Obama and again under President Trump . And it has been renewed despite repeated, serious violations of the law by the FBI via so‐called “back door” searches—literally millions of Section 702 database queries by FBI personnel for information on U.S. persons not necessarily wanted for a crime. 2. Washington Post Report on Section 702 of FISA According to the Washington Post on June 13, 2023, Congress will not renew powerful, expiring surveillance authorities without substantial changes to shield Americans from warrantless eavesdropping, senators in both parties warned Biden administration officials in a Senate Judiciary Committee on June 13, 2023. “I will only support the reauthorization of Section 702 if there are significant, significant reforms,” said Senate Judiciary Chairman Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). “And that means first and foremost, addressing the warrantless surveillance of Americans in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, the reforms must also include safeguards to prevent future abuses and ensure effective oversight by Congress and the courts.” The top Republican on the committee, Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), said that in the United States broadly, “there’s a warrant requirement to investigate an American citizen for wrongdoing. And we don’t want this to be used to get around that requirement. So bottom line is, let’s reauthorize this program and build in some safeguards.” “Why should we ever trust the FBI and DOJ again to police themselves under FISA when they’ve shown us repeatedly over more than a decade that they cannot be trusted to do so?” Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) said. 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 Commissioner, Former Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), and President Emeritus of the University of Guam, described the role and purpose of the Commission and his experiences with racial profiling as CAPAC Chair and President of University of Guam at the April APA Justice monthly meeting. Robert reminded us that the Commission is the vehicle through which all of us can participate and make our input known to the President. The Commission has committees to address various topics, but social justice issues such as racial profiling, discriminatory alien land laws, warrantless surveillance, and open science are not on the radar screen of the Commission. APA Justice encourages organizations and individuals to write to the Commission and speak at the public hearing on July 6. Robert also urges all of us to feel free to communicate with him directly at anacletus2010@gmail.com .The current Commission will expire later this year. An executive order will be needed to continue the work of the Commission, which unlike other similar commissions, does not have a permanent staff.Read Robert's remarks: https://bit.ly/3qogBU1 . Watch his remarks at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnIrq1hfl4A (video 11:48 to 25:21) Eight Years After False Accusation, Xiaoxing Xi Can Sue FBI According to the Washington Post on June 6, 2023, Xiaoxing Xi 郗小星 earned his PhD in Beijing, but he built his career in the United States. He arrived in the country in 1989 and worked at several colleges in New Jersey, Maryland and Pennsylvania before arriving at Temple University. By 2015, the physics professor was a respected expert in a cutting-edge field and, as interim head of the physics department, was on the cusp of a big promotion.So he was stunned to find a team of FBI agents at his Philadelphia home on an early morning in May that year. They arrested him in his pajamas at gunpoint as his family looked on in alarm. “I opened my door,” Xi recalled in an interview. “I realized all my life, everything I have done, is gone.” The Justice Department alleged Xi, a physicist and a naturalized U.S. citizen, had delivered confidential technology to China “to assist Chinese entities in becoming world leaders” in the field — an accusation that essentially cast him as a “technological spy.” He was interrogated and strip-searched. But the case ended in farce four months later after experts asserted that the government had misunderstood the science behind Xi’s work.Xi’s case was dismissed in September of that year, but he said the accusations cost him a senior position in Temple University’s physics department and cast a pall over his research and his family’s life.In 2017, Xi sued the U.S. government and leaders of the FBI, Justice Department and National Security Agency for what he alleged to be a willfully negligent prosecution clouded by bias over his Chinese ethnicity. But it languished for years and was later dismissed in federal court. Xi appealed the ruling in 2021.His lawsuit can now proceed, an appeals court ruled late last month, allowing Xi to continue his longtime quest to tell of his experience in court and join several other researchers of Chinese descent who have faced similar accusations.Xi’s lawsuit also alleged that investigators used powerful surveillance techniques to tap the professor’s phone and email communications without a proper warrant under Section 702 of FISA . As Xi’s appeal was pending, several other scientists of Chinese descent across the United States navigated parallel challenges. MIT Professor Gang Chen 陈刚 had similar charges against him dropped in January 2022 — and later that year made a major discovery in semiconductor research. Sherry Chen 陈霞芬 , a former hydrologist at the National Weather Service, won over $1.5 million from the government in November after challenging a 2014 Commerce Department investigation that accused her of espionage.On May 24, 2023, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Xi’s case had been wrongly dismissed. The case will return to district court around August.“Now we’ll put the government under oath to explain what they did,” Xi said.Read the Washington Post report: https://wapo.st/42r0sdP Professor Xi was interviewed by Sharyl Attkisson in Full Measure on June 4, 2023. Read the transcript and watch the video at https://bit.ly/3P6hCdJ (video 5:13). Hoover Institution Webinar: A Fresh Start from What? According to the Stanford Daily on June 8, 2023, the Hoover Institution hosted a discussion on the importance of promoting a sense of belonging for Chinese-Americans. The panel, titled “A Fresh Start: Safeguarding People, Rights, and Research Amid US-China Competition” brought attention to the worries Chinese academics have over being profiled for espionage or fraud-related charges regarding possible affiliations with China’s government. Larry Diamond , a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, moderated the panel with Gisela Perez Kusukawa , founding executive director of the Asian American Scholar Forum, Ambassador Gary Locke , former U.S. Ambassador to China (2011-2014), and Glenn Tiffert , research fellow at the Hoover Institution. Locke, who is also the chair of the non-profit Committee of 100 (C100), opened the event by acknowledging the rivalry between the two nations across various industries. He highlighted the “need to understand that our dispute and contention with Beijing is with the government of China and not the people of China, and certainly not Chinese Americans.” Locke said [they] believe the contributions of Chinese Americans often go unnoticed, a further reflection of the invisibilizing of Asian Americans.Kusukawa added that the treatment of Chinese-American academics is part of a broader historical pattern of anti-Asian rhetoric in America, resulting in the scapegoating of Asian Americans when the U.S. experiences tensions with an Asian country. “Since 1985, it has been U.S. policy that basic and applied research in science and engineering is basically unrestricted by the government,” Locke said. Much of the racial profiling Locke referred to can be seen in the "China Initiative" that was launched by the Department of Justice, according to Kusakawa. The initiative was intended to “protect US laboratories and businesses from espionage,” but many academics and civil liberties groups claimed that the program was biased against researchers of Chinese descent. Chinese-American scholars and scientists were falsely implicated during the Trump-era initiative, reporting disastrous effects on their personal livelihoods because of the profiling. The initiative was terminated in February of last year after outcry was raised over how the initiative’s rhetoric further encouraged Sinophobic sentiment. If we are to recognize the existing anti-Asian bias in America, “we need to start thinking [about] what are the due processes in place to protect Asian-Americans” Kusakawa said.Kusakawa acknowledged the difficulties a university or faculty member faces when critiquing or challenging policies that reflect a power imbalance between federal agencies and those in academia. She encouraged making the process of filing a complaint or reporting racial bias a less intimidating experience and focusing on creating a better environment for foreign scholars. “If we change how we approach research, are we genuinely going to become more competitive?” Kusakawa said. “We don’t think that Asian-Americans and Chinese-Americans and immigrants should continue to be collateral damage as we try to fix our policies in our country in addressing U.S. China relationships.” The webinar neglected to mention a Hoover Institution report that was issued alongside the launch of the "China Initiative" in November 2018. After appeals and protests by many Asian Americans organizations and individuals including C100 members, one noticeable change was made to replace the word "Chinese" by "China's" in the original title of the report "Chinese Influence and American Interests." Chapter 3 of the 2018 report (pages 39-50) covered "The Chinese American Community." On C100, the 2018 report (page 226) said "The Chinese embassy also targets prominent Chinese Americans through the Committee of 100, an organization of the most elite Chinese Americans in the United States. Committee members report significant pressure from the Chinese consulate on committee members to toe the Party line. Some prominent committee members are openly sympathetic to the goals of the Chinese Communist Party. One of them is ..." The following question was raised online during the June 6 webinar but not addressed by the moderator and speakers: "Does the Hoover Institution have any regret in publishing its report titled China's Influence and American Interest, which coincide[d] with the launch of the "China Initiative" in 2018, promoting the report heavily with Congress and media, and causing irreparable damage to many Chinese Americans and Asian Americans and eroding the civil rights and civil liberties for the communities? Otherwise, what are we restarting from?"On June 14, 2023, Larry Diamond replied: "We are not going to apologize for producing the report. It was a necessary and valid call to action in countering PRC malign influence activities in the United States and other democracies. We called for a balanced approach of 'constructive vigilance.' "We believe that as a democracy, we can and must defend both the integrity of our institutions and the rights and dignity of an important segment of American society. "We have always agreed that it is unacceptable to make unsubstantiated charges against people of Chinese ethnicity or fan generalized suspicions about a vital part of the American national mosaic. You may recall that the 2018 report you reference declared: 'we must guard against having this report used unfairly to cast aspersions on Chinese, whether Chinese American immigrants who have become (or are becoming) United States citizens, Chinese students, Chinese businesspeople, or other kinds of Chinese visitors, whose contributions to America’s progress over the past century have been enormous.' (p. 219) "We are not government officials and are not responsible for excesses or lack of balance and care in US government conduct. Likewise, we are not responsible for excesses or lack of balance and care in the wider public discussion and are disheartened by it. Our June 6th event with the Committee of 100 and the Asian American Scholar Forum aimed to model a more responsible approach. "Dialogue with the AAPI community is integral to the work that we do, and we remain committed to it."When fuel is put on fire, it cannot be just the responsibility of those who started the fire. There was one dissenter among the group of "China policy specialists" in the 2018 Hoover report. University of California San Diego Professor Susan Shirk wrote (page 217) at that time:"Although I have no problem with the factual research that has gone into specific chapters of the report, I respectfully dissent from what I see as the report’s overall inflated assessment of the current threat of Chinese influence seeking on the United States. The report discusses a very broad range of Chinese activities, only some of which constitute coercive, covert, or corrupt interference in American society and none of which actually undermines our democratic political institutions. Not distinguishing the legitimate from the illegitimate activities detracts from the credibility of the report. The cumulative effect of this expansive inventory that blurs together legitimate with illegitimate activities is to overstate the threat that China today poses to the American way of life. Especially during this moment in American political history, overstating the threat of subversion from China risks causing overreactions reminiscent of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, including an anti-Chinese version of the Red Scare that would put all ethnic Chinese under a cloud of suspicion. Right now, I believe the harm we could cause our society by our own overreactions actually is greater than that caused by Chinese influence seeking. That is why I feel I must dissent from the overall threat assessment of the report." Latest on Discriminatory Alien Land Bills 1. APA Justice Updates Its Tracking of State Alien Land Bills and Laws APA Justice updated its tracking map and table on June 8, 2023: https://bit.ly/43oJ0YI .According to LegiScan, Governor Kevin Stitt signed Oklahoma Senate Bill 212 into state law on June 6, 2023. This was also reported by KFOR-News4 on June 7, 2023. The bill will stop non-U.S. citizens including legal residents from buying land in Oklahoma. It becomes effective on November 1, 2023. 2. Louisiana House Bill 537 and Tulane University Statement According to LegiScan, the Louisiana House passed House Bill 537 by a vote of 73-26 on June 6, 2023. The bill was sent to Governor John Bel Edwards for approval on June 7.Tulane University President Michael A. Fitts and Provost Robin Forman issued the following statement:"We are deeply concerned by the potential impacts on the Tulane community of several bills under consideration in the Louisiana Legislature targeting land ownership by non-US citizens. We continue to share our concerns with legislators. These bills have made many of our faculty and students uncertain and anxious about their futures in our state, and we share those concerns. Universities thrive on their ability to foster a welcoming and safe community where we can recruit and retain the best and the brightest faculty, staff, and students from around the world to learn, research, and work together to solve our most pressing challenges. "Our international community plays a crucial role in the research and innovation ecosystem of our city and state. These international scholars and students have contributed greatly to the extraordinary success Tulane has experienced in research and in helping to increase economic growth in our region. It is essential that we recognize and appreciate their contributions to our state, our universities, and our neighborhoods."On June 7, 2023, NOLA.com also reported on " Bill targeting foreign land ownership approved by Legislature after tweaks ." 3. Florida’s Ban on Chinese Landownership Is a Racist Throwback According to an opinion by Shan Wu published by the Daily Beast on June 6, 2023, the reality of the Florida land law—and other laws like it in states including Texas, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Alabama—are throwbacks to the racist “Alien Land Laws” from the 19th and early 20th century that barred Asians from owning land.Lesser-known than the redlining and racist zoning laws that kept Blacks and other minorities from buying homes in predominantly white neighborhoods, these laws sought to stop Chinese and Japanese people from purchasing and even leasing land primarily in the American West. For example, the 1859 Oregon constitution barred any “Chinaman” from buying property, and the 1879 California constitution was amended to specifically target Asians by only allowing aliens to buy land if they were of “the white race or African descent.” Like today’s politicians, the leaders of that era stoked racist fears in order to eliminate perceived economic competition from Asians by outright banning them from immigration—the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act—and through Alien Land laws. The Chinese Exclusion Act was not repealed until 1943 against the backdrop of the United States allying with China in World War II. It was not until 1948 that the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an Alien Land law as unconstitutional in Oyama v. California . Even after that decision, however, many states did not repeal the laws until decades later. Florida finally got around to repealing its Alien Land law in 2021, only to have [Governor Ron ] DeSantis replace it with a new one.The federal government already scrutinizes foreign transactions, including real estate purchases, that may jeopardize national security through the interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The interagency coordination includes the Department of Defense as well as the intelligence community. The federal government—not Florida—is tasked with our national security, the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution likely preempts Florida’s ability to play in this arena. The Florida law also would appear to violate the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process clauses of the Constitution. And there is also the federal Fair Housing Act, which prohibits making housing unavailable on the basis of among other things: national origin.Then there’s the economic and financial detriment DeSantis would be causing to his own state if the law is successfully implemented. The history of scapegoating Asian competition in America is intrinsically intertwined with racist violence. In the 19th century such fears led to lynchings of Chinese workers like the 1885 massacres of Chinese miners at Rock Springs, Wyoming, and the 1982 murder of Vincent Chin , who was beaten to death with a baseball bat in Detroit by white men who saw him as the embodiment of Japanese auto-industry competition—never mind that Chin happened to be Chinese not Japanese.May was Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, during which the contributions of Asians in America were celebrated. Now is a great time to ask ourselves what does the future hold, when so many of our political leaders long for a return to a racially violent past.Read the Daily Beast opinion: https://bit.ly/43OO60g News and Activities for the Communities 1. US Supreme Court Backs Alabama Black Voters, Bolsters Civil Rights Law According to Reuters on June 8, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court handed a major victory to Black voters who challenged a Republican-drawn electoral map in Alabama, finding the state violated a landmark law prohibiting racial discrimination in voting and paving the way for a second congressional district with a Black majority or close to it.Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Rep. Judy Chu (CA-28) issued the following statement : “Today’s decision is a victory for the communities of color and advocates that challenged discriminatory political maps in Alabama, but it’s also a victory for the American people because the Voting Rights Act remains alive despite recent Supreme Court assaults on it. It’s a relief that this far-right Supreme Court—contrary to many recent decisions—respected the Constitution, laws passed by Congress, and its own precedent to come to the correct conclusion today. Our democracy is at its best when all of us can be represented in Congress, and today’s decision ensures that Black voters’ power in Alabama and across the South is not diluted and erased. CAPAC will continue to work with our Tri-Caucus partners to protect and strengthen the voting rights of all communities of color.” 2. Congressional Research Service Director Resigns According to Roll Call and Bloomberg Government , Congressional Research Service Director Mary B. Mazanec is stepping down effective June 30 amid persistent complaints about leadership within Congress’ public policy research institute. Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden announced Mazanec’s planned departure internally, and the House Administration Committee confirmed her resignation. The news comes after reports of high turnover, low morale and lagging diversity within the legislative support agency. On May 3, 2023, the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers sent the results of the Congressional Research Service 2022 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey to Hayden. 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 15, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #256 Registrations Open; Anming Hu; Students Targeted? Legislative Alert; Book Chapter; + #256 Registrations Open; Anming Hu; Students Targeted? Legislative Alert; Book Chapter; + In This Issue #256 · Registrations Open for Two Events Co-Hosted by The Baker Institute · Update of Exonerated Professor Anming Hu · Overblown or Legitimate: Are Chinese Students Targeted by CBP at U.S. Airports? · ALERT: Continuing Attempts to Revive The China Initiative and Texas Alien Land Bill · "New Red Scare: The China Initiative" Chapter in New Book · News and Activities for the Communities Registrations Open for Two Events Co-Hosted by The Baker Institute The National Science Foundation (NSF) launched its Research on Research Security (RoRS) program on July 12, 2023, to support the study of research security as required in the CHIPS and Science Act and following the federal requirements outlined in the National Security Presidential Memorandum-33 and its accompanying implementation guidelines .Following a virtual workshop on May 2, an in-person workshop will be hosted by Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy on May 23-24, 2024. The workshop will bring together leading experts from academia, government, and industry to explore the threats and challenges facing the international research and innovation ecosystem. Participants will identify current themes, major issues, and challenges in research security, as well as chart a road map for the future of the NSF’s RoRS program.The workshop is led by Rice University’s Office of Research Security and the Baker Institute Science and Technology Program in close collaboration with the University of Houston, IPTalons, Inc., the Society of Research Administrators International, and the NSF (Grant No. 2348714).Dr. Rebecca Keiser , NSF chief of research security strategy and policy, will deliver a keynote address on the origins of the RoRS program on May 23 at 8:30 am CDT. Her remarks will be livestreamed. Registration to watch her remarks is open at: https://bit.ly/4brHcCr ***** On June 6, 2024, the Baker Institute and the Office of Innovation at Rice University will co-host a hybrid forum titled "A Dialogue Between Academic & APA Communities and The FBI."The event brings together Jill Murphy , the deputy assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI, who oversees the FBI’s espionage investigations, and the leadership of the FBI Houston Field Office with members of the academic and Asian American communities to discuss the gaps between national science and technology policy and its implementation at the forefront of law enforcement.The Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition (TMAC) and APA Justice are co-hosts of this important forum. The communities will be represented by Gordon Quan , Managing Partner & Co-Founder, Quan Law Group, PLLC; Former Houston City Mayor Pro-Tem; David Donatti , Senior Staff Attorney, Legal Department, American Civil Liberties Union of Texas; and Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum. Professor Steven Pei serves as Moderator.Register to attend the forum between the academic/APA communities with the FBI via Zoom at : https://bit.ly/3wjg759 Update of Exonerated Professor Anming Hu On February 27, 2020, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the indictment of Professor Anming Hu 胡安明 , an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Biomedical Engineering at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK).Professor Hu, a naturalized Canadian citizen, 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 academic to go to trial under the China Initiative. A mistrial was declared on June 16, 2021, after the jury deadlocked. 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. 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.” On October 14, 2021, UTK offered to reinstate Professor Hu. On February 1, 2022, Professor Hu returned to his laboratory.It has been two years since Professor Hu was exonerated. He has agreed to speak at the June APA Justice monthly meeting and provide an update on his situation and his family.The APA Justice monthly meetings are by invitation only. The next meeting will be held on June 3, 2024. 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 . Overblown or Legitimate: Are Chinese Students Targeted by CBP at U.S. Airports? Recently, diplomats from China and the United States have debated over a new point of contention: How serious is the issue of Chinese students and scholars being subjected to secondary screening at airports upon arrival in the United States? Chinese diplomats have protested the treatment of Chinese students at the airport for months. Nicholas Burns , the U.S. Ambassador to China, reaffirmed that the U.S. is committed to opening its doors to Chinese students. Summer is coming; prospective students will come to the U.S. for school, and students in the country may travel back to China to visit their families. When those students return to the U.S., will they be “harassed” again at the airports?In a report published on May 20, 2024, The US-China Perception Monitor ( USCPM ) analyzed this question by focusing on how to read the numbers and how the Chinese students are stuck between U.S. Embassy or Consulates in China and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).For months, the Chinese media reported incidents of Chinese students and scholars undergoing secondary security checks and being held in “little black rooms” at U.S. airports. From January to March, students in Ph.D. science programs at Yale University, Johns Hopkins University, and other major U.S. research universities have been denied re-entry after visiting family in China, and in some cases, they were immediately sent back home, according to a Science report .The so-called secondary security check is an airport security measure used in the United States to select passengers for additional inspection. The State Department denied visas to 1,964 Chinese scholars in 2021 and 1,764 in 2022. Compared to many thousands of vias issued for Chinese students, the number of students affected is considered small.Nevertheless, visa denials and airport incidents inevitably negatively affect the morality of potential students and those already in this country, wondering whether coming to the United States is the right choice. Already, amidst tense U.S.-China bilateral relations, the number of students studying in the U.S. has declined sharply.Read the US-China Perception Monitor report: https://bit.ly/3WLxGpb .2024/05/10 中美印象简报 ： 中国学生被关“小黑屋”是否被夸大 ALERT : Continuing Attempts to Revive The China Initiative and Texas Alien Land Bill On May 22, 2024, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee will hold a markup hearing that includes H.R. 1398 , which is yet another attempt to relaunch the now-defunct China Initiative. Read more and watch the markup hearing: https://bit.ly/3UOqbLr On May 29, 2024, the Texas Senate Committee on State Affairs will hold a public hearing that includes " Protecting Texas Land and Assets : Evaluate strategic land and asset acquisitions in Texas by foreign entities that threaten the safety and security of the United States. Further, evaluate large-scale purchases of single-family homes by domestic entities and its impact on housing affordability for Texas families. Make recommendations to ensure Texans are secure from foreign threats and homes are affordable in our state." Read the Notice of Public Hearing: https://bit.ly/3QV7ODx "New Red Scare: The China Initiative" Chapter in New Book Steven Pei , Jeremy Wu , and Alex Liang co-authored a chapter " New Red Scare: The China Initiative " in a new book titled "Communicated Stereotypes at Work." The book, co-edited by Anastacia Kurylo and Yifeng Hu , was published by Lexington Books on May 15, 2024. The editors and contributors of the new book posit that stereotypes communicated in the workplace remain a pervasive issue due to the dichotomy between the discriminatory and functional roles that these stereotypes can play in a range of professional settings. Contributors demonstrate that while the use of stereotypes in the workplace is distasteful and exclusionary, communicating these stereotypes can also appear—on the surface—to provide a pathway toward bonding with others, giving advice, and reducing uncertainty. The result of this dichotomy is that those who communicate stereotypes in the workplace may not view this communication from themselves or others as being problematic. Pei, Wu, and Liang opined that the FBI has a long history of surveillance of ethnic Chinese scientists in the United States. McCarthyism, the Economic Espionage Act, and more recently the China Initiative were initiatives adversely impacting Chinese and Chinese Americans living in the U.S. The stereotypes of Asian and Chinese scientists as “disloyal” stem from the perpetual foreigner trope. The key here is that most of them were U.S. citizens. They are as much an American as any other American, yet their “loyalty” is perceived as less trustworthy. This stereotype has harmful, life-altering consequences. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/05/22 Heritage, Culture, and Community: The Future of America's Chinatowns2024/05/23 Responsible Collaboration Through Appropriate Research Security2024/06/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/06/06 A Dialogue Between Academic/AAPI Communities with The FBI2024/06/20-22 Social Equity Leadership ConferenceVisit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. Back View PDF May 22, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #115 "China Initiative" Dropped; CBS Interviews Gang Chen; Power Corrupts; Request to OSTP #115 "China Initiative" Dropped; CBS Interviews Gang Chen; Power Corrupts; Request to OSTP Back View PDF February 24, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #131 Toby on AAU; Senate Targets Faculty Foreign Gift; Labs PostDoc Shortage; Twitter #131 Toby on AAU; Senate Targets Faculty Foreign Gift; Labs PostDoc Shortage; Twitter Back View PDF June 29, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter