Search this site

Newsletter - #157 Ted Lieu; Urgent Letter; Franklin Tao; NASEM Workshop; Dr. Keiser Video; Sherry Chen #157 Ted Lieu; Urgent Letter; Franklin Tao; NASEM Workshop; Dr. Keiser Video; Sherry Chen Back View PDF December 2, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #118 CAPAC Meets President; Senator Wicker on DOC; Letter to Olsen; Editorials; Anming Hu #118 CAPAC Meets President; Senator Wicker on DOC; Letter to Olsen; Editorials; Anming Hu Back View PDF March 8, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #390 Eric Zheng, Susan Thornton, Susan Shirk at 04/06 Meeting; Birthright Citizenship; More #390 Eric Zheng, Susan Thornton, Susan Shirk at 04/06 Meeting; Birthright Citizenship; More In This Issue #390 · Remarks by Eric Zheng and Video · Remarks by Susan Thornton and Video · Remarks by Susan Shirk and Video · More on Birthright Citizenship · News and Activities for the Communities Remarks by Eric Zheng and Video During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 6, 2026, Eric Zheng , President of The American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai (AmCham Shanghai 上海美国商会), shared his on-the-ground perspective on the opportunities and challenges facing American companies in China, set against a backdrop of evolving U.S.-China relations. Prior to his current role with AmCham Shanghai, Eric had a successful career with AIG including serving as President & CEO of AIG China. Eric has been active in several non-profit and charity organizations. He is a member of Committee of 100 and currently serves as Chair of Committee of 100 Greater China Region. Eric began by noting that 2026 is a consequential year for bilateral ties, with anticipated high-level visits between the United States and China. Within this context, he highlighted the role of AmCham Shanghai as a longstanding institution supporting commercial engagement and mutual understanding between the two countries. Eric briefly traced the organization’s history, noting that AmCham Shanghai was originally founded in 1915, reflecting an early American business presence in China. It ceased operations in 1950 following the founding of the People’s Republic of China, and was reestablished in 1987 after China reopened to the global economy. Today, it represents approximately 1,000 multinational companies, primarily U.S.-headquartered firms, making it one of the largest American chambers of commerce in the Asia-Pacific region. Turning to the economic relationship, Eric emphasized the scale and depth of U.S.-China commercial ties. He cited roughly $421 billion in Chinese exports to the U.S. and $151 billion in U.S. exports to China, along with significant two-way investment flows. However, he underscored that this interdependence is increasingly challenged by policy volatility, particularly fluctuating tariff regimes. At one point, tariffs reached as high as 145% on Chinese goods, and although they have since declined, they remain elevated. As Eric observed, “when you run a company, you need some predictability… it’s really hard to plan for the long term” amid shifting policies. He identified three primary challenges facing American companies in China: · Geopolitical tensions , which he described as the “number one challenge,” creating uncertainty in both policy and business environments; · Rising domestic competition , with Chinese firms now highly innovative and competitive—“no longer copycats”—and in many areas outperforming multinational companies; · Economic slowdown , as China’s growth moderates and business expectations soften. Eric noted that American firms now see themselves leading mainly in product quality and development, while falling behind in areas such as speed to market, licensing, digital capabilities, and adoption of emerging technologies. Reflecting these pressures, business confidence has declined sharply, with only about 41% of companies expressing optimism about their five-year outlook in China—down significantly from historical levels near 80%. Despite these headwinds, Eric emphasized that China remains a critical market. He pointed to continued GDP growth of around 5%, a $19.6 trillion economy, and a rapidly expanding middle class projected to grow from 400 million to 800 million by 2035. He illustrated this scale by noting that China’s annual economic growth is “almost a trillion U.S. dollars,” effectively “recreating a Switzerland every year.” He explained that American companies remain engaged for two main reasons: to serve China’s large domestic market (“in China for China”) and to support global supply chains (“in China for global”). Eric concluded on a firm and pragmatic note, emphasizing that continued U.S. business engagement in China is not optional but strategically necessary. Despite geopolitical tensions and market challenges, he argued that disengagement would come at a significant cost to U.S. competitiveness, innovation, and global influence. Operating in China, he noted, is essential not only for accessing a critical market but also for learning from increasingly sophisticated competitors and staying at the forefront of global industry trends. In his view, the stakes extend beyond individual companies to broader national interests. A sustained U.S. commercial presence in China helps preserve economic linkages, supports mutual understanding, and ensures that American firms remain relevant in one of the world’s most important markets. As he underscored, maintaining this presence is ultimately “in the best interest of the United States”—not just as a matter of business, but as a matter of long-term strategic positioning in a competitive global landscape. A summary for the April 6 APA Justice meeting is being prepared. Watch a video of Eric’s remarks at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a03kPRXnU0 (15:14). For more information about AmCham Shanghai, visit https://www.amcham-shanghai.org/ Remarks by Susan Thornton and Video During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 6, 2026, Susan Thornton , Vice Chair of U.S. Heartland China Association (USHCA), remarked on USHCA’s work and its subnational and citizen diplomacy including education and other people-to-people exchanges with China. Susan is a retired senior U.S. diplomat with almost three decades of experience with the U.S. State Department in Eurasia and East Asia. She is currently a Senior Fellow and Visiting Lecturer in Law at the Yale Law School Paul Tsai China Center. She is also the director of the Forum on Asia-Pacific Security at the National Committee on American Foreign Policy and a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Susan highlighted her work with USHCA, which seeks to expand U.S.-China engagement beyond the coasts by focusing on the American heartland. The organization, chaired by former Missouri Governor Bob Holden , promotes connectivity in trade, education, and cultural exchange across “the 20-something states in the middle of the country” that often have less exposure to China-related opportunities and policy discussions. She described a range of initiatives, including agricultural cooperation, health system exchanges, and local government engagement. In agriculture, the group connects U.S. growers, researchers, and industry associations with Chinese counterparts to explore “the future of food systems,” and organizes events such as the annual U.S.-China Agricultural Roundtable in Henan Province. Educational exchanges are another priority, with programs that send American students—particularly from historically Black colleges and universities—to China, providing opportunities that “they would probably otherwise not have.” USHCA also promotes Chinese language learning and cultural education, reflecting concerns about a declining pipeline of U.S. China expertise. Susan emphasized the strategic importance of broadening national understanding of China, stating that “Americans will need to know more about China in the future, not less,” and that such knowledge “should not be overly concentrated on the two coasts.” She also highlighted local-level exchanges, including forums that bring together U.S. and Chinese municipal leaders to share experiences on issues like climate change, economic development, and public health. At the same time, she noted that this work has become increasingly difficult. Visa restrictions, travel uncertainties, and rising geopolitical tensions are complicating exchanges on both sides. She observed that “exchanges between the U.S. and China are becoming more fraught,” with students and scholars facing growing obstacles. Susan also pointed to a lack of clarity in U.S. policy, noting that agencies often operate without clear guidance, leading to actions that can appear “arbitrary” or “politicized.” She warned that China-related issues are increasingly “ripe for fear-mongering and weaponization” in the current political climate, including through state-level legislation. Despite these challenges, Susan stressed that the risks should not outweigh the benefits of engagement. She underscored that her organization takes a careful, independent approach, including not accepting funding from China, and remains committed to its mission. Concluding on a forward-looking note, she emphasized that engagement with China is not optional for the United States—particularly for the heartland—and expressed hope that upcoming high-level meetings could help reinforce the importance of sustained exchanges and mutual understanding. Watch a video of Susan’s remarks at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9LqzT_PcfY (8:29). For more information about the U.S. Heartland China Association, visit https://usheartlandchina.org/ Remarks by Susan Shirk and Video During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 6, 2026, Susan Shirk , Research Professor; Director Emerita, 21st Century China Center, University of California (UC), San Diego, shared her insights into the current state of US-China relations, especially the upcoming Trump-Xi summit. As former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of East Asia and Pacific Affairs and lifetime experiences, she is one of the most influential experts working on U.S.-China relations and Chinese politics. She is also Director Emerita of the UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC). Susan offered a candid and notably pessimistic assessment of the upcoming U.S.–China leader engagement between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping . While she acknowledged that leader-level diplomacy can create openings—what Joseph Nye has called the “funnel of choice”—she stressed that success depends on intensive groundwork that is currently lacking. Drawing on her experience in the State Department, she noted that past progress came only after extensive staff-level negotiations: “Professionals… put in hours of diplomatic efforts… before the leaders meet,” allowing both sides to define priorities, understand each other, and prepare deliverables. These preparations, she emphasized, are essential to making summits productive rather than symbolic. Susan had initially hoped the spring meeting could launch a sustained diplomatic process, but now sees more limited prospects. At best, she expects continuity rather than breakthroughs—likely preserving the existing “Busan truce” on tariffs, export controls, and rare earths. There may be incremental progress on trade and investment, such as movement on Phase 1 commitments or narrowly scoped Chinese investment in the U.S. However, she sees little chance of progress on harder issues. Susan warned that failure to address national security and people-to-people exchanges—including academic, journalist, and student flows—would be “tragic” and potentially dangerous. Taiwan is a particular concern, noting the absence of a clear U.S. strategy, raising the risk of improvised decisions during leader talks that could undermine regional stability. Her strongest criticism focused on the lack of preparation, which she described bluntly as “really diplomatic malpractice.” She pointed to weakened U.S. interagency capacity, limited sub-cabinet engagement, and a hollowed-out policy process: “Almost nothing at the sub-cabinet level… the National Security Council Asia staff is thinned out to almost no one.” At the same time, decision-making has become highly centralized. “The U.S. system has become almost as centralized… as China’s,” Susan said, leaving officials uncertain about objectives and reluctant to act proactively. In summary, Susan believes the absence of serious diplomatic preparation severely limits the potential of upcoming leader meetings. At best, they may stabilize tensions; at worst, they risk unstructured, leader-driven outcomes that could increase strategic instability. Watch a video of Susan’s remarks at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAoe5F8EmfI (11:21). More on Birthright Citizenship According to the New York Times , while the Supreme Court hearing on birthright citizenship on April 1, 2026, anchored in United States v. Wong Kim Ark , it has also renewed attention to a broader body of lesser-known cases involving Asian immigrants that helped define U.S. immigration and constitutional law. While United States v. Wong Kim Ark affirmed that children born in the United States are citizens regardless of their parents’ nationality, the justices also referenced cases such as Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Fong Yue Ting v. United States, and United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind . Together, these cases reflect a period when U.S. immigration law was explicitly designed to exclude Asians. Beginning with the Chinese Exclusion Act, federal policy severely restricted Asian immigration and barred naturalization. In response, Chinese and other Asian communities organized extensive legal challenges—filing over 10,000 lawsuits—often supported by groups like the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association. These efforts were not only defensive but strategic, helping to establish enduring legal principles. As one historian explained: “High-quality U.S. citizen lawyers were hired to litigate cases large and small.” Some cases expanded rights. In Yick Wo, the Court ruled that a neutral law applied discriminatorily violated the Constitution, extending equal protection to noncitizens. Others reinforced federal power or racial exclusion. In Fong Yue Ting, the Court upheld broad deportation authority. In Thind and earlier in Ozawa v. United States, the Court denied citizenship based on shifting and often contradictory definitions of “whiteness,” even stripping citizenship retroactively. Although Congress later dismantled racial barriers—especially with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965—these earlier rulings remain foundational. Wong Kim Ark, in particular, continues to underpin modern interpretations of birthright citizenship. Today, Asian Americans are one of the fastest-growing populations in the United States, largely due to post-1965 immigration. Yet awareness of this legal history remains limited. Advocates warn that weakening birthright citizenship could have disproportionate consequences, even for lawful residents. The report also highlights a broader challenge: many Asian Americans are unfamiliar with the history of exclusion laws and civil rights struggles that shaped their status today. As one lawmaker observed after educating constituents about this past: “They had no idea.” The fight over birthright citizenship is not just about one case, but about a long legacy of Asian American legal challenges that helped define constitutional rights in the United States—making today’s debate both historically grounded and deeply consequential. Read the New York Times report: https://nyti.ms/4cdMPpn News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/04/14 Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes - Anla Cheng 2026/05/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2026/05/12-14 Celebrating 250 - Building America’s Future TogetherVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. APA Justice January Monthly Meeting Summary Posted Summary for the January 2026 APA Justice monthly meeting has been posted at https://bit.ly/4sqZPxV . We thank these distinguished speakers for sharing their insightful remarks and updates: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus · Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) · Deborah Frankel , Counsel, Bloch & White LLP · Kyle Bigley , Associate, Bloch & White LLP · Baimadajie Angwang 昂旺 , former NYPD Officer · Paul Cheung 鄭文耀 , President, Committee of 100 · Hua Wang 王华 , Chair, United Chinese Americans · Haipei Shue 薛海培 , President, United Chinese Americans · Sharon Wong , National Chair, OCA National Center · Thu Nguyen , Executive Director, OCA National Center # # # 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 April 13, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #198 8/7 Meeting; Fear Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership; China Initiative Legacy #198 8/7 Meeting; Fear Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership; China Initiative Legacy In This Issue #198 2023/08/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting "Can we move?" - Chinese Residents Fearful Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership Axed China Initiative’s Racial Profiling Legacy Haunts Scientists in US 2023/08/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, August 7, 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 Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), speakers will include: 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, to report on the latest developments of the lawsuit against Florida's discriminatory alien land law Echo King 金美声 , President, Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA), to provide on-the-ground reports about the July 18 court hearing, press conference, and protests in Tallahassee; and a report by Jenny Liu 刘洁 , President, Yick Wo Institution 益和学会 Cynthia Choi , Co-Executive Director, and Shanti Prasad , Advocacy Manager, Chinese for Affirmative Action (CAA), to give a brief introduction of CAA and its recent roles and activities in alien land laws, warrantless surveillance/reauthorization of Section 702, anti-Asian hate, and related topics Christine Chen , Executive Director, APIAVote, to give a brief introduction of APIAVote, observations on the communities' reaction to the alien land bills/laws, introduction of laws in some states criminalizing those who assist voters (AP report: https://bit.ly/3NM9z3s ), and APIAVote plans for the upcoming 2024 elections 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 "Can we move?" - Chinese Residents Fearful Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership According to the Guardian on July 26, 2023, a Florida law barring certain foreign nationals from buying property has brought confusion, thoughts of moving and protests. Earlier this year, Fort Lauderdale resident Yulin Wu ’s white co-workers told her not to worry about a Florida bill that would prohibit some Chinese people and entities from acquiring real estate. She had heard about the proposed legislation on Chinese-language social media.On May 8, Governor Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill (SB) 264 into law, a measure that bars almost all property ownership for people or entities from various “countries of concern” including China, Cuba, North Korea and Russia. Under the law, they cannot buy property with some exceptions; individuals who hold a non-tourist visa or have been granted asylum can buy a residence of less than 2 acres (0.8 hectares) if it is at least 5 miles (8 km) away from a military base or “critical infrastructure”. The law singles out Chinese people with higher penalties for violation, but it does not apply to those who are naturalized US citizens or who have legal permanent “green card” residency.Wu said: “I don’t understand why this law passed. It definitely changed my feelings about Florida and the United States. I’m not welcome here.”That sentiment is echoed by many Chinese residents in the US as laws banning foreign property purchases, most targeting Chinese people, have proliferated around the nation. According to the advocacy group APA Justice , 33 states have proposed or enacted similar bans against ownership of real estate by people of specific national origins. As legislators have revised their bills to address arguments that they are bigoted, some have added exceptions for lawful permanent residents who hold green cards.Many Chinese residents in the United States, like Wu, are alarmed by this latest anti-Chinese development, and some are becoming activists.Wu, the first in her family to attend college, spoke to the Guardian via phone while visiting New York City. She’s now mulling a move there. Wu settled in Florida just two years ago, passed the bar exam and landed a job. Wu bought a townhome as an investment property just before Florida’s SB 264 was passed, and she wonders now whether she will be forced to sell it. The land of anyone who buys or sells property in violation of the law could be seized by the government. Wu’s townhome is located near an airport, and she’s unsure whether such an area is off-limits under the law. Gabriel Chin , a law professor at the University of California, Davis, said this latest trend follows a long history of “alien land laws”. Florida’s alien land law was only repealed in 2018, making it the last state to do so. Chin led his students in an effort to undo similar laws that remained on the books.At a July 18 court hearing in which a judge considered blocking the law, Chinese Americans demonstrated , some traveling from around the country. Zhengfei Guan is a University of Florida professor who has organized protests against the new law. He immigrated to the US in 2006. He noted that recently, “My daughter was asking, ‘Can we move?’” The 17-year-old, who is a US citizen, fears the increasingly hostile environment for people of Asian descent.He and Wu, the Fort Lauderdale lawyer, see the Florida measure as one component of the Chinese-US conflict, along with a trade war, accusations about the origins of Covid and violent attacks on Asian people. According to Guan, he and fellow Chinese academics have been adversely affected by China-fighting rhetoric and professional discrimination through the US justice department’s “China Initiative”. Discontinued last year, that federal effort investigated researchers under the theory that spies in unconventional places were sharing valuable intelligence data with Beijing. Even though Florida would allow Guan’s children, as citizens, to buy a house there, he perceives the property ban as part of a pattern of bias.This new batch of alien land laws has sparked confusion and thoughts of relocation, but also coalition building across the nation. Steven Pei , a Taiwanese immigrant and electrical engineering professor in Houston, flew to Tallahassee for last week’s court proceeding. Although naturalized, he observed: “Nobody can tell if I am a citizen or not. I have to prove it?”Pei credited Black politicians, especially US Representative Al Green of Texas, for key support in defeating that state’s version of an alien land law in May. Pei said: “He organized the major rallies here … and what really touched me is he has been meeting [ethnic] leaders every Saturday since March.” Green encouraged the formation of a new non-partisan Multicultural Advocacy Coalition that Pei said includes African Americans and Latinos alongside Asian Americans. Green himself said: “I’m concerned we not discriminate based on where you are from.” Recalling segregated facilities and having to step off the sidewalk if a white person were approaching during Jim Crow, he added: “I was unfortunate enough to be born a son of the segregated south. I know what discrimination is like. There are many things I lived through I would not want us to return to.”Read The Guardian report: https://bit.ly/3qf8itW . U.S. Senate Approves Amendment to FY2024 National Defense Authorization Act. According to Forbes and other media reports, the Senate voted 91-7 on July 25, 2023, to prevent China, Russia, North Korea and Iran from purchasing U.S. farmland—part of a bipartisan push to scrutinize adversaries’ business dealings in the United States. The proposed rule—passed as an amendment to the annual defense budget bill—would require the president to review farmland transactions from those four countries, and block any deals that would give a foreign entity from any of the countries “control” of U.S. farmland and waive those that don’t.The measure would also give the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, commonly known as CFIUS, the power to evaluate land deals, using data from the Department of Agriculture, and block those deals if it sees fit (CFIUS already evaluates other transactions with foreign actors).Prior to this amendment being attached, the bill was narrowly passed by the Republican-led House earlier this month, but that version included a number of conservative priorities related to abortion, transgender care and other hot-button issues that are unlikely to be accepted by the Democrat-controlled Senate. The Senate bill will return to the House for debate and a vote with the new amendments.Read the Forbes report: https://bit.ly/3DwWoPn After the Senate vote, Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) provided a v ote explanation , which says in part: "As written, the language [of Rounds amendment No. 813 to S. 2226, the FY24 National Defense Authorization Act] seems to equate individuals from the specified countries as synonymous with their governments. Under this provision, if an individual with a valid visa, who has no connection to one of the governments listed, seeks to buy agricultural property above a certain threshold, the U.S. Government would deny them the ability to proceed with the purchase simply because of their national origin. While the national security concerns this amendment seeks to address are real, we must not discriminate on individuals based on national origin, race, or ethnicity. I voted in favor of my colleagues' amendment in order to continue the conversation on this important issue, but will not support any final provision that does not resolve these civil liberties concerns." Axed China Initiative’s Racial Profiling Legacy Haunts Scientists in US According to the South China Morning Post on July 25, 2023, physicist Xiaoxing Xi ’s life changed forever when a team of armed FBI agents burst into his home in Philadelphia and rounded up his family at gunpoint.Xi was arrested and charged with sharing sensitive US company technology on May 21, 2015 – three years before the Donald Trump administration launched its controversial China Initiative targeting scientists in the US for perceived connections with Beijing.The charges against Xi – who was accused of trying to transfer information to China about the design of a pocket heater – were dropped four months later, but not before he lost his position as chairman of the physics department at the Philadelphia-based Temple University. During the FBI’s investigation, Xi was also not allowed to appear on campus, apply for research grants or talk to his students, even privately.“That’s a very traumatic experience,” Xi said the US government’s case was based on four emails sent from his Temple University address that had nothing to do with the pocket heater.Xi’s ordeal took place under former president Barack Obama , but the Trump administration’s initiative vastly broadened the scope of later investigations into scientists of Chinese heritage in the US.About 150 academic scientists were openly investigated and two dozen hit with criminal charges before the initiative was eliminated by the justice department in February 2022. But the scrutiny has never stopped and there is little sign that the Joe Biden administration is doing enough to repair the damage, scientists of Chinese heritage have told researchers.The China Initiative, touted as a response to “economic espionage” by Beijing, was heavily criticized at the time as “unconstitutional” by the American Civil Liberties Union, which said it was based on racial profiling because it “singled out scientists based on their race, ethnicity or national origin”.A lasting impact of the initiative is the widespread fear still reported by many scientists with Chinese heritage, according to a study by researchers from Princeton University, Harvard, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).The study, published last month in the National Academy of Sciences peer-reviewed journal PNAS, found general feelings of fear and anxiety had led many of the scientists to consider leaving the US or refrain from applying for federal grants. Before he became a target for the FBI, Xi’s research was funded by nine federal grants and he had 15 people on his team. Today, Xi receives one grant for a much smaller focus of study, with just one researcher to help him.MIT mechanical engineering professor Gang Chen – who was arrested in January 2021 under the China Initiative and had his charges dismissed one year later – said he was afraid to apply for federal grants because of anxieties around being racially profiled.“Basically, I’m done with federal funding,” Chen told NBC Asian America in August. He has also shifted from nanotechnologies with obvious commercial applications to more fundamental research, according to the February edition of Nature .Another study, published in March by The Review of Higher Education , found a “consistent and statistically significant pattern” of racial profiling of Chinese and other Asian scientists.The researchers – from the University of Arizona and Committee of 100, a Chinese-American non-profit – surveyed about 2,000 scientists from the top US research universities and concluded that concerns about racial profiling remained, despite the end of the China Initiative.Lead author Jenny Lee said there was no sign of “any governmental action to undo the harmful effects” of the China Initiative.One Chinese-American scientist who recently returned to China, because of the initiative’s impact, said the aim of the initiative had been to create fear among scientists, as part of a US effort to contain China’s scientific progress.“[The US] has achieved its purpose. US-based scientists are coming back to China and those in China are afraid to go back to the US,” said the scientist, who requested anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity. “It’s happening every day.”But some experts argue that cutting off relations with Chinese academia undermines Washington’s intention of competing and winning a technology race against Beijing. Junming Huang , an associate research scholar at Princeton University and co-author of the PNAS study, said the US should “continue to welcome and attract Chinese scientists to maintain [its] global leadership in science and technology in the long run”.“A key lesson we can learn from the China Initiative is we cannot apply a broad brush to solve problems and apply policies. We need surgical precision and data-based solutions that offer genuine steps moving forward to tackle specific problems,” he said.Despite the challenges reported by scientists of Chinese heritage in the US, not everyone is returning to China.Meanwhile, Xi’s efforts to seek redress from the courts for his experience continues. A lawsuit filed against the lead FBI agent and others in 2017, alleging that they “made knowingly or recklessly false statements” to support their investigation and prosecution was dismissed by a district court in 2021.Xi appealed the decision last year and in May the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled his case had been wrongfully dismissed. Xi and his family are waiting to see if the US government will appeal the ruling and move the case forward, he said. In written testimony presented in 2021, Xi said that “whether the US and China are in a cold war or hot war, it is wrong for law enforcement to profile Chinese scientists based on where they come from”.“All Chinese professors, scientists and students are not non-traditional collectors, or spies, for China,” he said.Speaking to the South China Morning Post last week, Xi said the China Initiative had been based on the assumption that Chinese scientists were “suspected of spying for China”. “That’s the fundamental reason for all these cases and all the investigations that have happened … In a sense, ‘presumed guilty until proven innocent’. This condition has not changed,” he said. Read the South China Morning Post report: https://bit.ly/3rCJixk Back View PDF July 31, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #338 7/7 Meeting; AAU Wins Ruling; Role of Research Universities; Visa Interview to Restart #338 7/7 Meeting; AAU Wins Ruling; Role of Research Universities; Visa Interview to Restart In This Issue #338 · 2025/07/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · US Judge Rules for AAU and Universities · Tony Chan: The Role of Research Universities in a Changing World Order · State Department Restarts Student Visa Interviews with New Rules · News and Activities for the Communities 2025/07/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held on Monday, July 7, 2025, starting at 1:55 pm ET.In addition to updates from: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) We welcome and are honored by the following confirmed distinguished speakers: · Lynn Pasquerella , President, American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) · Toby Smith , Senior Vice President for Government Relations & Public Policy, Association of American Universities (AAU) · Clay Zhu 朱可亮 , Founder and President, Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA) · Paul Cheung 鄭文耀 , President, Committee of 100 · Tony Chan 陳繁昌 , Former President of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (2018–2024) and Former President of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (2009–2018) 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 . US Judge Rules for AAU and Universities (Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications Intern, contributed to this report)According to AP News , Reuters and other media reports, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts issued a final judgment on June 20, 2025, in favor of Plaintiffs Association of American Universities (AAU), the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, the American Council on Education, and 13 universities, blocking the National Science Foundation's (NSF) policy change that would have capped indirect costs for research grants at 15%. The judge ruled that the NSF's policy change is "invalid, arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to law."The civil lawsuit Association of American Universities v. National Science Foundation (1:25-cv-11231) was filed on May 5, 2025. AAU and a coalition also brought these lawsuits against the Trump administration with recent rulings: · Association of American Universities v. Department of Health & Human Services (1:25-cv-10346) . On April 4, U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley entered a final judgment and permanent injunction in favor of the Plaintiffs. The Trump administration has filed an appeal. · Association of American Universities v. Department of Energy (1:25-cv-10912) . On May 15, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs granted Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction , finding that the DOE’s Rate Cap Policy likely violates the Administrative Procedure Act—by taking agency action that conflicts with existing regulation, is arbitrary and capricious, and is impermissibly retroactive—and poses a risk of irreparable harm to research institutions. AAU is an organization of leading research universities in the U.S. and Canada, founded in 1900 to promote academic excellence and influence national higher education and research policy. Its members conduct a significant share of the nation’s research and are central to advancing innovation, economic development, and scientific leadership. Toby Smith , Senior Vice President for Government Relations & Public Policy at AAU, will speak at the APA Justice monthly meeting on July 7, 2025.***** WP Opinion: Trump is Undermining U.S. Science On June 18, 2025, the Washington Post published an opinion authored by Neal Lane , physicist and former director of the National Science Foundation (NSF), and Michael Riordan , physicist and author, warning that the Trump administration’s reckless and erratic actions toward U.S. science are placing the nation at serious risk. The authors urge Congress to immediately reassert its statutory authority over National Science Foundation (NSF) funding, direction, and management in order to support and uphold the future of U.S. science, technology, economic well-being, and national security.Established in 1950, the NSF originally focused on basic research in the physical sciences, only experiencing a burst of political support and funding after the launch of the Soviet Union’s Sputnik I satellite in 1957. Throughout its tenure, the agency has contributed to the development of the internet and World Wide Web , by funding Mosaic and Stanford University’s Digital Library Initiative, in which Larry Page and Sergey Brin developed the Google search engine. NSF has also stimulated great advances in laser and quantum technologies, as well as microbiology.However, the NSF fired 168 employees in February, roughly 10% of its workforce, in compliance with Trump’s executive order aimed at reducing federal personnel to "boost efficiency." The NSF has been terminating grants at a record pace, particularly in areas such as climate science and educational diversity. In 2025, the NSF has awarded only $1 billion in new grants, just half the usual pace compared to previous years. The future seems even more bleak — Trump’s 2026 fiscal year budget calls for slashing $5 billion from the current $9 billion NSF budget. Neal Lane and Michael Riordan emphasize that wholesale firings, budget-slashing, and arbitrary elimination of grants particularly harm young, emerging scientists as they often depend on NSF fellowships and grants to launch their scientific careers. This discouragement directly harms the future of U.S. science. Tony Chan: The Role of Research Universities in a Changing World Order Tony Chan 陳繁昌 is a distinguished computational mathematician who served as the President of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology from 2009–2018, and King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia from 2018 to 2024 .Educated at the California Institute of Technology (B.S., M.S.) and Stanford (Ph.D.), Dr. Chan held leadership roles at Yale and UCLA before becoming assistant director of the Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate at the U.S. National Science Foundation. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and a fellow of IEEE, AAAS, and SIAM. In March 2025, Dr. Chan published an essay titled " The Role of Research Universities in a Changing World Order. " He opined that as global power centers realign, research universities are more than academic institutions—they are key players in shaping global values, talent flows, and geopolitical influence. As tensions rise between East and West across sectors like trade, technology, and security, particularly STEM-focused institutions, now face pressure to engage with broader global rivalries. In particular, 1. Geopolitics and the rise of the East Geopolitical shifts, especially China’s rise, are reshaping the role of research universities. While U.S. and European institutions have long led in innovation and academic freedom, China’s targeted investments in top universities align education with national goals for technological and economic strength. This rivalry now reflects a deeper contest over global norms and influence. As Chinese universities expand international engagement, U.S. institutions grow more insular under political pressure, national security concerns, and revived efforts like the China Initiative—leading to a steady unraveling of U.S.–China academic partnerships. 2. Student and faculty mobility: a double-edged sword The global mobility of students and faculty—once a hallmark of internationalization in higher education—is increasingly shaped by shifting geopolitics, particularly the U.S.–China rivalry. While Chinese and Indian students long sought Western education, rising visa restrictions, scrutiny over security concerns, and a perception of unwelcomeness have curbed that trend. Simultaneously, China is attracting top overseas talent back home and nurturing new generations domestically, as seen in the success of DeepSeek, an AI firm staffed by local graduates. This reverse flow challenges Western universities' ability to attract top talent and underscores the need to balance openness with national security. As global dynamics shift, talent and innovation are increasingly staying in—or returning to—China, reshaping the future of academia and global leadership in science and technology. 3. Research competition versus collaboration Tensions between competition and collaboration in research are growing, as nations race for dominance in fields like AI and biotech while needing global cooperation on issues like climate change and pandemics. Research universities are caught in the middle—fueling national innovation but reliant on international exchange. Western governments are increasingly restricting collaboration over national security concerns, often invoking vague “dual use” rules, which may backfire and hinder progress. Chinese universities remain eager to engage globally, but geopolitical pressures make partnerships difficult. Without creative ways to balance openness and security, research may fracture along national lines, slowing global progress. 4. The way forward: Navigating a complex landscape In a shifting world order, research universities face the challenge of balancing national interests with global collaboration while staying true to their mission of advancing knowledge and educating future leaders. To succeed, they must uphold core values, including long-term societal service, pragmatic engagement with national security concerns, a strong defense of academic freedom, and active leadership in shaping global discourse. Navigating this complex landscape requires resilience, vision, and courage, especially as universities play a vital role in bridging political divides and fostering shared understanding across borders. Dr. Chan will explore these issues at the APA Justice monthly meeting on July 7, 2025. State Department Restarts Student Visa Interviews with New Rules (author: Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications Intern)According to the Washington Post and multiple media reports, the State Department has begun student visa interviews after a three-week hiatus, implementing a strict social media vetting process set to take effect in the coming week.The thorough vetting process requires applicants’ social media accounts to be public in order to be scrutinized for perceived hostility towards the U.S. or risk extreme penalties in the application process. State Department staff members have been instructed to “identify applicants who bear hostile attitudes toward our citizens, culture, government, institutions, or founding principles; who advocate for, aid or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to U.S. national security; or who perpetrate unlawful antisemitic harassment or violence.” The vetting process applies to all foreign nationals who apply for F, M, and J visas, regardless of the institution of study. Affecting not only new candidates but also those whose applications are currently in progress, the new vetting process also includes applicants who have already been interviewed but have not been finally approved.In justification of the policy, the State Department pointed to two executive orders from President Donald Trump , one designed to block hostile foreign actors from entering the country and the other to address antisemitism. The Department reiterated it remains concerned with protecting American institutions of higher education from those who would “steal technical information, exploit U.S. research and development, and spread false information for political or other reasons.”Several critics of the policy have expressed concern over its vague nature, suggesting a broader interpretation could result in the government denying visas from those who deserve them. Several government-affiliated individuals raised concerns about the increased burden on consulates, noting that officials do not have the time to complete the thorough vetting process for every applicant. The agency issued 446,000 student visas in 2023.While education advocates have expressed relief that the three-week hiatus is over, concerns remain that the policy will discourage international students from seeking overseas educational opportunities in the U.S.***** In a separate development, on June 20, 2025, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs of Massachusetts issued an order temporarily blocking the Trump administration’s attempt to prevent Harvard University from hosting international students, according to AP News and other outlets. The ruling marks a legal victory for Harvard as it continues to challenge multiple federal sanctions in an ongoing dispute with the White House. While the order preserves Harvard’s ability to enroll foreign students while the case proceeds, it does not resolve all legal questions. Judge Burroughs noted that the federal government retains the authority to evaluate Harvard’s eligibility to host international students through standard legal procedures. “We expect the judge to issue a more enduring decision in the coming days,” Harvard said in an email to international students. “Our Schools will continue to make contingency plans to ensure that our international students and scholars can pursue their academic work to the fullest extent possible, should there be any changes to visa eligibility or enrollment status.” News and Activities for the Communities APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/06/16-24 Discover China 2025: Summer Youth Exchange to the Greater Bay Area2025/06/25 Bridging Relationships with Policymakers2025/06/28-30 2025 ICSA China Conference2025/06/29 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/07/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/07/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/07/25-27 Asian American Pioneer Medal Symposium and Ceremony 2025/07/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. Andrea Chen Appointed Executive Director of the Vincent Chin Institute The Vincent Chin Institute (VCI) has announced the appointment of Andrea Chen as its first Executive Director. VCI was founded in 2023 to continue the mission and work of the past 40 years of movement and building solidarity against anti-Asian violence and all forms of hate.Andrea Chen brings over 20 years of experience driving systemic change through racial justice and economic inclusion initiatives. She served for more than 15 years as CEO and Co-founder of Propeller, a nationally recognized social innovation incubator based in New Orleans, Louisiana. In her role as Executive Director, Andrea Chen will lead three core program areas: Community Organizing, Narrative Change, and Education.A commemoration of the death of Vincent Chin took place the Chinese American Museum in Los Angeles on June 23, 2025, the 43rd anniversary of his death. Vincent Chin was murdered in Detroit in an anti-Asian hate crime, sparking a national movement for Asian American civil rights. Speakers at the commemoration include Aki Maehara , professor of Asian American history at East Los Angeles College, who was the victim of an apparent hate crime earlier this year and a speaker at the June 2025 APA Justice monthly meeting. 3. Physics Today Interviews Dr. Xiaoxing Xi In a report by Physics Today on June 20, 2025, physicist Xiaoxing Xi 郗小星 recounts how the Cultural Revolution deeply affected his childhood, with his father imprisoned as a “counterrevolutionary” and his education interrupted. After Mao Zedong ’s death, China reopened its universities, and Dr. Xi seized the opportunity to study at Peking University—an experience that set him on the path to becoming a scientist and eventually immigrating to the U.S.These early experiences left Dr. Xi with a strong awareness of political injustice, which shaped his reaction to his own wrongful arrest in the U.S. in 2015. Some have described the United States is going through its own Cultural Revolution today.Read the Physics Today report: https://bit.ly/3HV6EGp # # # 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 June 24, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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

Newsletter - #278 9/9 Monthly Meeting; Harmful Anti-China Rhetoric; NASEM Report; War for Chinese Talent #278 9/9 Monthly Meeting; Harmful Anti-China Rhetoric; NASEM Report; War for Chinese Talent In This Issue #278 · 2024/09/09 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Rhetoric of Who is Tougher on China Has Tragic Consequences · International Talent Programs in the Changing Global Environment · The War for Chinese Talent in America: The Politics of Technology and Knowledge in Sino-U.S. Relations · News and Activities for the Communities 2024/09/09 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, September 9, 2024, starting at 1:55 pm ET. In addition to updates by Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC); Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC; and Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), confirmed speakers are: · Christine Chen , Co-Founder and Executive Director of Asian Pacific Islander American (APIA) Vote · Jane Shim , Director, Stop Asian Hate Project, Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) · Tori Bateman , Director of Advocacy, Quincy Institute · Sandy Shan , Director, Justice Is Global 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 . ***********APIAVote is the nation’s leading national, nonpartisan organization to engage, educate, and empower Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPIs) to strengthen their voices and create impact. Since 2007, APIAVote’s mission is to work with local and state community based organizations to mobilize AAPI communities in electoral and civic engagement. After attending and hosting events at the RNC and DNC, Christine Chen will update us on the state of AAPI voters in the upcoming November elections. The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) is a national organization founded in 1974 to protect and promote the civil rights of Asian Americans. It is a key member of the legal team that filed suit against Florida's alien land bill known as SB 264 in 2023. More recently, it filed an amicus brief with 11 Asian Pacific American organizations in support of Dr. Yanping Chen 's privacy rights lawsuit. Jane Shim will update us on the these latest developments and related AALDEF activities.After five years of discussion across the progressive community, the Quincy Institute has teamed up with the Institute for Policy Studies and Justice is Global to produce a brief on " A Program for Progressive China Policy . " It proposes a new policy framework that would shift the current US approach of pressure and exclusion against China toward a relationship rooted in solidarity, healthy competition, and cooperative efforts to address shared challenges. Tori Bateman and Sandy Shan will give a joint presentation on the brief and discuss plans for its promotion over the next few months. Rhetoric of Who is Tougher on China Has Tragic Consequences On September 1, 2024, The Washington Post reported that 171 campaign ads for congressional and presidential candidates have already mentioned China in this election cycle. These ads include a range of dark insinuations: one candidate allegedly recruited as a spy by Chinese leaders in his youth, another accused of profiting from a Chinese fentanyl manufacturer, and a third alleged to have sold Chinese-made SUVs at his car dealership. Both Democrats and Republicans are aggressively associating their opponents with China as the 2024 campaign intensifies. They hope that invoking China—a country many Americans blame for the mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic, the opioid crisis, and ongoing economic challenges—will sway voters in their favor.China-bashing has long been a staple of U.S. politics. In 2016, former President Donald Trump made cracking down on China central to his campaign, and both parties have historically capitalized on voter anger over outsourcing, especially in Rust Belt states. However, as tensions between the two nations rise in 2024, the issue has become especially heated, with candidates sparring over locked in battles over who is more connected to China. During the 2020 cycle, 82% of China-related ads for Senate candidates were funded by Republicans or GOP-aligned groups. This cycle, however, most of these ads are paid for by Democrats, with 36% coming from Republicans.Some of the attacks have veered into conspiratorial territory, evoking Cold War-era fears. Republicans, for example, have made unfounded claims that Minnesota Governor Tim Walz , Kamala Harris ’s running mate, may have been “groomed” by China. Walz, who traveled to China numerous times as a young English teacher and later as a member of Congress, has been baselessly insinuated by GOP figures like Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) and Sen. JD Vance of Ohio as being a Chinese plant. The barrage of negative ads and rhetoric suggests that future Congresses may adopt an even more hardline stance toward China, partly to appease voters’ growing skepticism. Since 2019, Congress has sharpened its tone, introducing six times as many China-related bills in 2021 as in 2013. In recent years, lawmakers have allocated billions more to counter China’s military, restricted its access to semiconductors, and bolstered global anti-China coalitions. Countering China remains one of the few areas of bipartisan agreement on Capitol Hill.However, there is growing concern that this intense focus on China could lead to a broader blame game targeting Chinese people, including immigrants. Since the pandemic, the FBI has reported a surge in hate crimes against Asian Americans. Rep. Norma J. Torres (D-Calif.), who serves on the House subcommittee overseeing U.S. foreign policy spending, warned that for some of her colleagues, "it all starts and ends with China," which she warns could "create a lot of potential for violence in our communities again."Read the Washington Post report: https://wapo.st/3XaMcFG The scientific and Asian Pacific American communities are still mourning the tragic passing of Northwestern University Professor of Neurology Dr. Jane Y. Wu who was reportedly subject to years of endless investigations by the National Institutes of Health's "China Initiative." APA Justice is currently looking into the reported suicide of an internationally renowned professor of electrical engineering at the Arizona State University during the "China Initiative." There has already been a reported suicide of a Stanford University professor at the beginning of the "China Initiative." Rhetoric of who is tougher on China has tragic consequences on the Asian Pacific American community, especially those of Chinese descent. International Talent Programs in the Changing Global Environment On August 29, 2024, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) released a consensus study report titled International Talent Programs in the Changing Global Environment . The report recommends ways to improve relative to programs and incentives used by the U.S.'s strategic competitors. At the request of the U.S. Department of Defense, this report reviews foreign and domestic talent or incentive programs and their corresponding scientific, economic, and national security benefits. The report acknowledges the legitimate concerns about protecting U.S. intellectual property and national security but also points out the negative consequences of the China Initiative. It notes that the initiative has created a climate of fear among researchers, particularly those of Chinese descent, and has led to a decline in collaboration between U.S. and Chinese scientists. This, in turn, could hinder the U.S. innovation ecosystem, which has long benefited from the contributions of international researchers.Specifically on the China Initiative, "The U.S. Department's China Initiative resulted in lingering, chilling effects on attracting and retaining Chinese-origin STEM talent because of a fear of and actual harassment and intimidation. Such chilling effects extend to other vulnerable groups, including both foreign and domestic students and professionals, and result in the loss of talent from the United States, avoidance by researchers of some fields of inquiry and the pursuit of federal funding, and reduction of international collaborations," the NASEM panel finds. The report also discusses how the U.S. government's response to China’s Thousand Talents Program, including increased scrutiny of researchers with ties to the program, has contributed to the broader concerns about international talent programs. The report critically examines the role of U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies in managing the risks associated with international talent programs. While these agencies are tasked with protecting national security, their involvement has led to tensions with the academic and research communities. The report highlights instances where aggressive law enforcement actions have resulted in the wrongful prosecution of researchers, damaging careers and undermining trust in the U.S. as a welcoming destination for international talent.The report suggests that a more balanced approach is needed, one that protects national security without undermining the contributions of international researchers. It calls for clearer guidelines and better communication between law enforcement agencies, universities, and researchers to ensure that security measures do not harm the U.S. research ecosystem.The report concludes with several recommendations for improving the management of international talent programs in the U.S. and the effectiveness of U.S. mechanisms for attracting and retaining scholars, It advocates for policies that strike a balance between protecting national security and maintaining an open and welcoming environment for international researchers. The report also calls for increased transparency in the implementation of security measures, as well as efforts to rebuild trust within the academic community.Read the NASEM report: https://bit.ly/3TgaHQl Juan Zhang , editor at US-China Perception Monitor, contributed this report. According to Science on September 3, 2024, the NASEM report warns that the U.S. risks losing its status as a global leader in research due to a broken immigration system. The report highlights the importance of allowing more immigrants with advanced degrees in STEM fields to stay in the country, as the U.S. heavily relies on foreign-born scientists. It criticizes the now-defunct China Initiative that targeted Chinese scientists under the guise of preventing economic espionage. The panel urges the government “to take measures to address the lingering chilling effects of the China Initiative.” Gisela Kusakawa , who leads the Asian American Scholar Forum, calls the critique a “milestone” for a NASEM report.The panel suggests that U.S. immigration policy should be reformed to attract and retain top international STEM talent. Recommendations include easing the green card process for foreign-born STEM experts, removing country-specific caps, and granting green cards to those who earn advanced degrees in the U.S.The report also warns that restrictive policies in the name of national security could backfire if perceived as discriminatory, and it advocates for more transparency and fairness in research security measures. The report calls for a significant investment in domestic STEM education but notes that building a strong domestic talent pool could take decades, similar to the long journey the U.S. took to achieve energy independence.The report recommends a massive investment aimed at attracting more domestic students into STEM fields akin to the push after the Soviet Union launched Sputnik.The panel chair, Mark Barteau , chair of chemical engineering at Texas A&M University, predicts it could take a long time, using as an analogy how long it took the United States to achieve energy independence. “Richard Nixon [in 1973] was the first U.S. president to say that the solution is not to turn off imports but to boost domestic production,” Barteau says. “And it took us decades to achieve it. I'm not sure the timeline between oil and STEM talent is all that different.”Read the Science report: https://bit.ly/47fYktj The War for Chinese Talent in America: The Politics of Technology and Knowledge in Sino-U.S. Relations On September 27, 2024, Stanford University will host a book talk on "The War for Chinese Talent in America," featuring David Zweig , Professor Emeritus, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, as speaker.In 2018, the Trump Administration launched the "China Initiative," a campaign aimed at curbing China's efforts to access U.S. technology. Dr. Zweig’s new book documents the U.S. government's measures to limit technology transfer to China and features case studies of several unknown victims of this campaign. It also explores the detrimental effects on Sino-American scientific collaboration and the education of Chinese students in America. Join the China Program at Stanford's Shorenstein APARC for a presentation by the book's author on this critical topic in U.S.-China relations.Dr. Zweig is from Canada and has been a China expert for 50 years. He is fluent in Mandarin. He spoke at the September 2020 APA Justice monthly meeting. His presentation, meeting summary, and video recording are located here: https://bit.ly/3Q9Uda6 . Register for the Stanford University event here: https://stanford.io/4e97uKB News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2024/09/09 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/09/10-12 Chronicle Festival: The Road Ahead to 20352024/09/12 AA4D: Nobel Laureates and Scientists for Democracy 2024/09/19 1990 Teachers Workshop: Asian American Identity2024/09/19-20 AANHPI Unity Summit2024/09/25 C100: State of Chinese American Survey 2024 2024/09/26 White House Initiative AA& NHPI Policy Summit2024/09/27 The War for Chinese Talent in America: The Politics of Technology and Knowledge in Sino-U.S. Relations2024/10/02 C100: Asian American Career Ceiling Initiative The Community Calendar has moved. Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. Copyright © 2024 APA Justice, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in or have expressed interest. Our mailing address is: APA Justice P.O. Box 1242 McLean, VA 22101 Add us to your address book We do not share, sell, rent or trade any of your information with third parties unless you provide explicit consent. Read our Privacy Policy here . Back View PDF September 5, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #398 Maryland Speaker and Delegate at 6/1 Meeting; Leaders Comment; NYT Immigrant Squeeze;+ #398 Maryland Speaker and Delegate at 6/1 Meeting; Leaders Comment; NYT Immigrant Squeeze;+ In This Issue #398 · Racist Video Targets Maryland State Delegate · Maryland Speaker Condemns Racism and Defends Diversity at APA Justice Meeting · Invited Leaders Comment on Maryland Incident · NYT : Trump Squeezes Immigrants by Cutting Them Off From Jobs, Health Care and Housing · News and Activities for the Communities Racist Video Targets Maryland State Delegate Maryland state Delegate Chao Wu , a Chinese American, was targeted in a racist and xenophobic video released by Republican Delegates Mark Fisher and Brian Chisholm . The lawmakers accused Delegate Wu of being a Chinese spy, mocked his accent, and employed harmful anti-Asian stereotypes. In a 13-minute video podcast criticizing an artificial intelligence bill proposed by Delegate Wu, Delegates Fisher and Chisholm questioned his political loyalties based strictly on his birthplace, resorted to harmful tropes, and mocked how he speaks. The controversy erupted in May 2026, coinciding with Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. The incident was widely denounced as xenophobic and deeply offensive. Top state officials, including House Speaker Joseline Peña-Melnyk , the Legislative Black Caucus of Maryland, the Maryland Legislative Asian American Caucus, and the Montgomery County Council, publicly condemned the attacks and demanded apologies. Maryland House Minority Leader Jason Buckel publicly distanced the House Republican Caucus from the video and defended Delegate Wu. Watch the WBAL-TV report: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd7ZXlGo7wA (2:45). Maryland Speaker Condemns Racism and Defends Diversity at APA Justice Meeting Maryland House Speaker Joseline Peña-Melnyk and Maryland State Delegate Chao Wu addressed the APA Justice monthly meeting on June 1, 2026, discussing the racist video that targeted Delegate Wu, the response of Maryland House leadership, and the broader importance of diversity, inclusion, and civil rights. Speaker Peña-Melnyk explained her leadership decision to send a formal letter reprimanding Delegates Mark Fisher and Brian Chisholm , stating that their conduct was offensive, unacceptable, and beneath the dignity of the Maryland General Assembly. She emphasized that reducing a colleague to harmful stereotypes, questioning his loyalty because of where he was born, and mocking his accent were disrespectful and unbecoming of anyone entrusted with public service. “It echoes a long and painful history of discrimination that has no place in Maryland or in the House of Delegates,” she said The Speaker reminded Delegates Chisholm and Fisher that the Maryland General Assembly is a body made stronger by the diversity of those who serve here and the communities it represents. “Every member deserves to be treated with respect, and every Marylander deserves to see themselves reflected in a government that values them. We can have disagreements about policy without demeaning one another’s humanity. That is the standard this House must uphold.” On the issue of immigration, the Speaker reinforced that, “The bottom line is that immigrants matter. We have rights, and we contribute immensely to our state. When immigrants arrive here, we bring with us the richness of our culture, our history, our ideas, our creativity. How could we not benefit as a result? Maryland is one of the most ethnically, racially, and religiously diverse states in the nation. And to me, this is our superpower – the secret sauce behind Maryland’s success. Here we recognize that these things are strengths, not weaknesses. Our diversity makes us more dynamic and more resilient.” ***** Maryland State Delegate Chao Wu ( www.chaowu.org ) thanked the organizers for the invitation and expressed particular appreciation for the strong support he received from Maryland House leadership, especially Speaker Joseline A. Pena-Melnyk, following the release of a racist video targeting him. Delegate Wu said that when he first learned about the video, he felt angry, saddened, and disappointed, especially because the individuals involved serve on the same legislative committee as he does. However, those feelings were balanced by a sense of encouragement and empowerment from the broad coalition of support he received from legislative leaders, the AAPI Caucus, the Latino Caucus, the Black Caucus, the Jewish community, and many other organizations and individuals. He emphasized that the incident was larger than a personal attack on himself. In his view, it reflected broader challenges facing a diverse state like Maryland, where immigrants and people of many backgrounds contribute to society, but they are not recognized and respected. Delegate Wu noted that he had never viewed his accent as a problem and said that when people have difficulty understanding him, he simply repeats himself or speaks more slowly. Addressing criticism of legislation he sponsored related to artificial intelligence, Delegate Wu defended the bill as a reasonable transparency measure requiring developers of large language models to disclose information about their training data. He noted that similar legislations are being debated in other states, and that respected organizations had also supported the proposal. Invited Leaders Comment on Maryland Incident During the APA Justice monthly meeting on June 1, 2026, Maryland State Delegate Lily Qi , who also chairs the Maryland Legislative Asian American & Pacific Islander Caucus, praised the swift and forceful response to the racist video targeting Maryland legislators, crediting much of its impact to the leadership of Speaker Joseline A. Pena-Melnyk . She highlighted the Speaker's immediate and unequivocal condemnation, along with coordinated statements from the Maryland Asian Pacific American Caucus and other organizations, which helped frame the incident as unacceptable and worthy of broad public attention. Delegate Qi observed that the incident occurred during Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, underscoring a longstanding challenge faced by Asian Americans: persistent questions about their loyalty, belonging, and identity as Americans. She argued that despite the nation's history and progress, Asian Americans continue to confront stereotypes that cast them as outsiders or suspect citizens. She emphasized the importance of representation in leadership, noting that Speaker Pena-Melnyk's experience as an immigrant enabled her to articulate why immigrant backgrounds are assets rather than liabilities in public service. Delegate Qi also commended Asian American organizations nationwide for mobilizing quickly and visibly, demonstrating both political strength and a willingness to defend their place in American society. A major theme of her remarks was solidarity across communities. Delegate Qi pointed to support from the Black, Latino, Women's, Jewish, Muslim, LGBTQ+, and other caucuses in Maryland, arguing that such alliances are essential. She stressed that Asian Americans should likewise stand with other groups when they face discrimination or attacks, because protecting civil rights requires collective action. Delegate Qi characterized the attacks as part of a broader pattern of divisive politics that seeks to exploit fears about diversity and immigration. She argued that such rhetoric attempts to deny the humanity and legitimacy of fellow Americans based on their backgrounds. She also connected the controversy to earlier legislative efforts by the same delegates involved in the video. Delegate Qi recalled that they had previously introduced proposals similar to the "alien land laws" enacted in some states, which would have restricted land ownership by Chinese nationals. She described those measures as a modern-day version of exclusionary policies that single out people based on national origin and warned that such approaches create a dangerous precedent that could eventually be applied to other groups. Delegate Qi concluded by urging continued vigilance in defending the rights of all Americans, emphasizing that opposition to discrimination and exclusion requires sustained advocacy, coalition-building, and community leadership. ***** Cindy Tsai , Executive Vice President and General Counsel for the Committee of 100, thanked the organizers and the Maryland leaders who brought attention to the racist video, particularly Speaker Joseline A. Pena-Melnyk , Delegate Chao Wu , and Delegate Lily Qi , for elevating the issue to the national level and engaging the community in discussion. Drawing on her work with the Committee of 100, Cindy Tsai emphasized the importance of distinguishing between legitimate concerns about the actions of a foreign government and unfairly attributing those actions to an entire ethnic community. She noted that advocacy efforts in recent years have helped encourage more careful and responsible public discourse on these issues. After watching the video, Cindy Tsai said she was troubled by its content and rejected the notion that disclaimers such as “not all Chinese people are bad” can excuse or negate language that attacks individuals based on their accent, background, or ethnicity. In her view, condemning stereotypes while simultaneously engaging in discriminatory rhetoric does not make such speech acceptable. Cindy Tsai indicated that society must do better in engaging in responsible and respectful public discourse, particularly when discussing issues involving ethnicity, nationality, and political concerns. She praised the broad coalition of organizations and communities that responded to the incident, highlighting the importance of solidarity across different groups. She credited Speaker Pena-Melnyk’s public statement with helping mobilize support and described the response as a moment in which the Asian American and Pacific Islander community stood together to affirm that Asian Americans belong in the United States and deserve equal respect. Cindy Tsai concluded by expressing pride in the community’s response and urging continued visibility, advocacy, and coalition-building to confront discrimination and defend the rights and inclusion of Asian Americans. ***** Haipei Shue , President of United Chinese Americans, began by thanking Speaker Joseline A. Pena-Melnyk for her immediate and unequivocal condemnation of the racist incident. He emphasized that strong leadership makes a significant difference in how communities respond to discrimination and exclusion. Drawing on his experience working with legislatures across multiple states, Haipei Shue contrasted Maryland's political environment with that of many states where immigrant and Asian American communities have far less representation and support. He noted that Maryland benefits from both diverse leadership and the presence of Asian American elected officials in the legislature, which helps ensure that community concerns are heard and addressed. Haipei Shue observed that in states lacking such leadership and representation, harmful policies can advance more easily and sometimes become law. In some cases, he said, advocates struggle to find policymakers willing to engage with concerns about constitutionality, civil rights, or the impact of legislation on immigrant communities. He recalled instances where objections based on constitutional concerns were dismissed, leaving litigation as the only recourse. Against that backdrop, Haipei Shue described Maryland as providing a sense of reassurance and protection for immigrant communities. He credited the state's leaders for creating an environment in which concerns can be raised, discussed, and addressed through the democratic process rather than ignored. He concluded by expressing gratitude to Maryland's elected leaders and emphasizing that their support, responsiveness, and commitment to diversity provide an important safeguard for immigrant and Asian American communities. NYT : Trump Squeezes Immigrants by Cutting Them Off From Jobs, Health Care and Housing On May 30, 2026, The New York Times reported a sweeping, methodically planned White House strategy to make the United States economically and socially inhospitable to immigrants — both undocumented and many with legal status — pressuring them to leave voluntarily rather than depending solely on high-profile deportation raids. The effort is overseen by Stephen Miller , one of the president's most influential advisers, who has directed federal agencies across the government to use every regulatory tool at their disposal to cut immigrants off from jobs, healthcare, housing, financial services, and family benefits. On employment, the Trump administration has revoked airport security clearances for workers holding Temporary Protected Status — a legal humanitarian designation — abruptly ending the jobs of people like Raquel Molina , a Salvadoran immigrant who had cleaned planes at Boston's Logan Airport for nearly three decades. The administration has also proposed barring asylum seekers from receiving work permits, a change that could affect more than two million people who currently hold or have renewed those permits. In addition, many immigrants have been banned from obtaining commercial driver's licenses, cutting them off from careers in trucking and freight. On financial services, Trump signed an executive order urging banks to scrutinize customers' immigration status. Federal agents also launched an investigation — called Operation Pickpocket — into alleged financial fraud by immigrants. The probe ultimately found that most immigrants had opened bank accounts lawfully using valid identification, yet the broader pressure campaign has had a chilling effect, discouraging immigrants from engaging with financial institutions at all. On healthcare, the administration moved to require immigration documentation at the roughly 1,600 federally funded community health clinics that have historically served undocumented patients. Though courts paused that requirement after a multistate lawsuit, fear alone caused patient numbers to drop sharply. In Santa Barbara, California, county officials briefly stopped treating thousands of undocumented patients out of concern that the federal government would retaliate by clawing back unrelated grants. Nurses described clinics becoming "ghost towns." On housing, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced plans to bar mixed-status families — those with both documented and undocumented members — from public housing. Under prior rules, only one household member needed to hold legal status. The new policy could displace an estimated 20,000 families, many of which include U.S.-citizen children. On family and child benefits, the administration's tax legislation blocked the federal child tax credit from applying to U.S.-citizen children whose parents are undocumented, significantly cutting refunds for millions of mixed-status families. Officials are also planning to add a five-year waiting period for child care subsidies for legal immigrant children, effectively ensuring most age out of eligibility before they can receive help, and to end undocumented families' access to Head Start preschool programs. The administration frames all of these measures as protecting American citizens and taxpayers. Independent research, however, suggests immigrants use public benefits at lower rates than native-born Americans and fill critical labor needs. So far, more than 116,000 people without permanent legal status have voluntarily left the country, with many more believed to have departed without notifying the government. Former Homeland Security official Daniel Delgado , who served under both parties, called the strategy "immensely effective" — a whole-of-government effort touching virtually every dimension of immigrant life in America. Read the New York Times report: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/30/us/politics/trump-immigrants-health-housing.html . On May 22, 2026, Rep. Grace Meng (NY-06), Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), issued a statement condemning the Trump administration’s new memo that will force immigrants seeking permanent residency, or a green card, to return to their home countries to apply—a drastic change from longstanding policy. Read Chair Meng’s statement: https://bit.ly/43Ei60F . Read the policy change memo: https://bit.ly/4uJPAXy News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/06/10 Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes - Calvin Tsao 2026/06/17 Voting Barriers for AA & NH/PI Women 2026/06/27-28 From Crisis to Coalition: Lessons from the Front Lines in Minneapolis/St. Paul 2026/06/28-07/01 UCA: 2026 Chinese American Convention 2026/07/04 Unveiling of Mabel Ping-Hua Lee Mural 2026/07/06 APA Justice Monthly MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. APAICS: Voting Barriers for AA & NH/PI Women WHAT : APAICS' Women's Collective Office Hour: Voting Barriers for AA & NH/PI Women WHEN : June 17, 2026, 4:00-5:00 pm ET WHERE : Webinar HOST : Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies Moderator : Annie Nguyen , APAICS Speakers: · Jessica Jones Capparell , League of Women Voters · Christine Chen , APIAVote · Fajer Saeed Ebrahim , National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum (NAPAWF) DESCRIPTION: Join the conversation and hear the panelists highlight resources and discuss voting barriers—from voter outreach and language access, to the impacts of legislation such as the SAVE America Act. As elections across the country ramp up, conversations like these matter more than ever. REGISTRATION : https://apaics.fillout.com/t/uyPxkMvMEBus # # # 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 APA Justice website at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF June 5, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #23 APA Justice Meetings; Charles Lieber Lawsuits; New Visa Rules; Early Voting; 2020 Census #23 APA Justice Meetings; Charles Lieber Lawsuits; New Visa Rules; Early Voting; 2020 Census Back View PDF October 19, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #70 [Roundtable Special] APA Justice Statement; Susan Lee Letter; How You Can Join And Help #70 [Roundtable Special] APA Justice Statement; Susan Lee Letter; How You Can Join And Help Back View PDF June 29, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #201 Florida Injunction; Dr. Yanping Chen; FBI Spy Hunter; United Against Hate; 08/26 March #201 Florida Injunction; Dr. Yanping Chen; FBI Spy Hunter; United Against Hate; 08/26 March In This Issue #201 Federal District Court Refuses to Halt Florida’s Discriminatory Housing Law The Case of Dr. Yanping Chen vs FBI et al An FBI Spy Hunter’s Rise and Fall “United Against Hate” Forum in San Francisco 2023/08/26 March on Washington Federal District Court Refuses to Halt Florida’s Discriminatory Housing Law On August 17, 2023, a federal district court judge refused to preliminarily block Senate Bill (SB) 264, an unconstitutional Florida law banning many Chinese immigrants, including people here as professors, students, employees, and scientists, from buying a home in large swaths of the state. As a result, SB 264 remains in effect. The judge's order denying the preliminary injunction motion is posted here: https://bit.ly/3QHsorA 2023/08/18 Washington Post: Florida judge refuses to halt law restricting Chinese land ownership 2023/08/18 South China Morning Post: US judge declines to block Florida law restricting Chinese from buying property 2023/08/17 AsAmNews: District Court declines to stop Florida Chinese land ban 2023/08/17 National Iranian American Council: NIAC Condemns Florida Court’s Denial of Preliminary Injunction for Alien Land Law (S.B. 264) 1. Press Release by ACLU According to a press release by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Florida District Court ruling addressed the plaintiffs’ request for emergency relief and does not resolve the underlying legal arguments brought in the case. ACLU, ACLU of Florida, DeHeng Law Offices PC, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), and the law firm Quinn Emanuel are representing four Chinese immigrants who live, work, study, and raise families in Florida, but are prohibited under SB 264 from buying a home, as well as Multi-Choice Realty, a local real estate firm whose business is harmed by the law.“This law is hurting immigrants who are trying to build lives in Florida,” said Jian Song , owner of Multi-Choice Realty LLC. “As a Chinese American who has called Orlando my home for over 20 years, I’ve been extremely worried since this law went into effect.” Under SB 264, people who are not U.S. citizens or permanent residents, and whose “domicile,” or permanent home, is in China, are prohibited from purchasing property, including homes, in Florida. The sole exception is narrow: People with non-tourist visas or who have been granted asylum may purchase one residential property under two acres that is not within five miles of any “military installation.” This term is vaguely defined in the law, but there are at least 21 large military bases in Florida, many of them within five miles of cities like Orlando, Miami, and Tampa — putting many major residential and economically-important areas completely off-limits. A similar but less restrictive rule also applies to many immigrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Syria. But the law singles out people from China for especially draconian restrictions and harsher criminal penalties. “While today’s decision is disheartening, our clients will continue to fight for their rights to equality and fairness on appeal,” said Ashley Gorski , senior staff attorney at ACLU’s National Security Project. “Florida’s law legitimizes and expands housing discrimination, in violation of both the Constitution and the Fair Housing Act.”“Today’s ruling heavily relies on a decision from the Supreme Court in 1923, a time when Asian immigrants were not allowed to become citizens, own land, or vote,” said Clay Zhu , Managing Partner of DeHeng Law Offices PC. “We shall not go back.”In the early 20th century, politicians used similar justifications to pass “alien land laws” in California and more than a dozen other states, prohibiting Chinese and Japanese immigrants from becoming landowners. These racist policies severely restricted economic opportunities for immigrants and exacerbated discrimination against Asian communities in the United States, before eventually being overturned in the courts and by state legislatures. Florida was one of the last states to repeal its “alien land law” in 2018. “Our community will continue to fight against Florida’s unjust and racist law,” said Bethany Li , legal director at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. “These types of laws use false stereotypes about Asian Americans as perpetual foreigners and have repeatedly harmed our community — from the Chinese Exclusion Act, to the Japanese Americans’ incarceration during World War II, and the surveillance of South Asians in the post-9/11 period.”“We are disappointed by today’s decision, and believe it fails to account for our clients’ constitutional and statutory rights,” said Derek Shaffer , partner at Quinn Emanuel. “In our view, which the U.S. Government has supported as an amicus, people from China should be no less welcome in Florida than they are elsewhere in the United States and free to participate in the housing market on equal footing with everyone else. Recognizing that this decision decides only our request for a preliminary injunction, we look forward to continuing this litigation and to seeking recourse on appeal.”Read the ACLU press release: https://bit.ly/45p3MIq 2. Statement by CALDA In a statement by the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance, CALDA announced that 历史不容倒退：地区法院未批准禁止令，我们将立即全力上诉 (History Shall Not Regress: District Court Did Not Grant Restraining Order, We Will Appeal Immediately With Full Strength). "We believe the District Court's decision was entirely wrong. We will not stop here, and our legal team will quickly file an appeal to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court in Atlanta in the next few weeks to overturn the district court's decision as soon as possible," the statement said. "CALDA and our civil rights alliance have formulated a response strategy. We will immediately appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court, striving to overturn the ruling of the District Court as soon as possible. Next, we will continue to pursue our lawsuit with unwavering determination.""CALDA firmly believes that the road to rights protection may be difficult, but the door to fairness and justice has never been closed. We have only encountered a temporary setback. The truth must take time to practice and validate, but our belief in the final victory has never wavered! While the struggle against SB264's diabolical law may continue for some time, CALDA and allies are bound to overturn it completely. Our mission is to completely eliminate systematic racial discrimination against the Chinese, and to ensure that the rights and interests of the Chinese are treated fairly and justly."Read the CALDA statement in Chinese: https://bit.ly/3P0zGpd 3. Statement by NAPABA According to a statement on August 17, 2023, the National Asian American Bar Association (NAPABA) and the Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Tampa Bay (APABA Tampa Bay) profoundly disagree with the Florida federal court ruling.After the plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction seeking to bar the enforcement of SB 264, NAPABA and APABA Tampa Bay joined a coalition of partners and submitted an amicus brief in support of the injunction. Notably, the United States, in a Statement of Interest submitted by the U.S. Department of Justice, supported the injunction and advised that SB 264 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."The Florida statute is a textbook example of invidious discrimination. The plain sweep of SB 264 not only places restrictions on individuals from China and certain other countries, including those lawfully present in the United States, in purchasing property, but it also imposes greater criminal penalties on Chinese buyers than for those from other restricted countries," the statement said."The District Court’s reasoning relies heavily on the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Terrace v. Thompson, 263 U.S. 197 (1923), which upheld Washington State’s alien land law and barred a Japanese citizen from leasing farmland. In doing so, the District Court endorses an outdated historical legal argument that alien land laws do not violate equal protection because they applied broadly to all aliens ineligible for citizenship. This theory completely disregards the fact that at the time of enactment, Asian immigrants were not eligible to naturalize. Terrace, which has not been directly overturned, noted in 1923 that it was “reasonable” that “eligible aliens are free white persons and persons of African nativity or descent,” and that “the natives of European countries are eligible. Japanese, Chinese and Malays are not.” Resting today’s decision on such discredited case law and reasoning is unacceptable."Despite the setback today, NAPABA’s vigorous advocacy will continue. "At bottom, policymakers are free to address the legitimate national security concerns of the United States, but they may not enact discriminatory laws on the backs of the AANHPI community."Read the NAPABA statement: https://bit.ly/44uwM0F The Case of Dr. Yanping Chen vs FBI et al On August 17, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a Memorandum opinion and Order on the civil case of Dr. Yanping Chen 陈燕平 vs Federal Bureau of Investigation et al.According to the Memorandum Opinion and Order,"In 2017, Fox News Network aired a series of investigative reports about Plaintiff Yanping Chen. The thrust of the stories, principally authored by journalist Catherine Herridge , was that Ms. Chen had concealed her former membership in the Chinese military on her U.S. immigration forms and might have been using a professional school she founded in Virginia to funnel valuable information about the American military to the Chinese government. The reports also contained materials—including photographs and images of internal government documents—that Chen alleges were leaked by government personnel to Herridge and Fox, in violation of the Privacy Act. After extensive discovery and several opinions by this Court, Chen has been unable to identify the source of the alleged leak. She thus issued subpoenas to Herridge and Fox, seeking to compel them to reveal their confidential source or sources. Asserting the First Amendment’s qualified privilege for journalists, and urging the Court to adopt a federal common law newsgathering privilege, Herridge and Fox moved to quash the subpoenas."The Court recognizes both the vital importance of a free press and the critical role that confidential sources play in the work of investigative journalists like Herridge. But applying the binding case law of this Circuit, the Court concludes that Chen’s need for the requested evidence overcomes Herridge’s qualified First Amendment privilege in this case. The identity of Herridge’s source is central to Chen’s claim, and despite exhaustive discovery, Chen has been unable to ferret out his or her identity. The only reasonable option left is for Chen to ask Herridge herself."Read the Memorandum Opinion and Order: https://bit.ly/3YET7XS An FBI Spy Hunter’s Rise and Fall According to AP News and the New York Times , Charles McGonigal , a former high-ranking Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) counterintelligence official pleaded guilty to conspiring to violate sanctions on Russia by going to work, after he retired, for an oligarch he once investigated.As the chief of counterintelligence for the FBI in New York, he was tasked with rooting out foreign efforts to steal vital national security and economic secrets.McGonigal pleaded guilty to a single count of conspiring to launder money and violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. He could face up to five years in prison. Judge Jennifer H. Rearden scheduled his sentencing for December 14. He is one of the highest-ranking FBI agents ever to be convicted of a crime. The case has raised unsettling questions about the FBI’s ability to detect corruption within its ranks. Prosecutors suggested that McGonigal traveled extensively while at the bureau, meeting with foreign officials and businesspeople who, on the surface, had nothing to do with his job. Agents are required to report such contacts and certain financial transactions and to take lie-detector tests, but the bureau relies heavily on the integrity of the people it has placed in positions of trust. 2023/08/16 AP News: Ex-FBI counterintelligence official pleads guilty to conspiracy charge for helping Russian oligarch 2023/08/14 New York Times: Fast Living and Foreign Dealings: An F.B.I. Spy Hunter’s Rise and Fall “United Against Hate” Forum in San Francisco According to a LinkedIn post, The Asian American Foundation (TAAF) partnered with U.S. Attorney Ismail Ramsey for the second “United Against Hate” forum in San Francisco. The continued goal for these events are to strengthen relationships between government partners and community-based organizations by hosting a space for honest and open dialogue for law enforcement and community advocates.Participants recounted stories of anti-AAPI hate and explained why many victims do not report incidents to law enforcement. They discussed the need for accountability and stronger prevention measures to help the community feel safer. The District Attorney’s Civil Division also shared civil remedies that the community can access to address incidents of anti-AAPI bias and discrimination.Read the TAAF LinkedIn post: https://bit.ly/3P404i9 2023/08/26 March on Washington On August 26, 2023, a 2023 March on Washington will commemorate the 60th anniversary of the historic March on Washington, organized by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other civil rights leaders in 1963, to continue the fight for democracy, social justice and civil rights. Join the King family and the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities at the Lincoln Memorial to honor the past, acknowledge the present and march toward a future of progress and equality. Back View PDF August 18, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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