Newsletter - #51 "Is This Patriot Enough?"; National Day Of Action And Healing; Upcoming Events #51 "Is This Patriot Enough?"; National Day Of Action And Healing; Upcoming Events Back View PDF March 29, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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

Warrantless Surveillance The domestic surveillance over American citizens for whom there is no evidence or proof that they are involved in any illegal activity. THE NUMBERS Pending cases 5 Failure-to-disclose cases 91% Days of the China Initiative 1210 Recent developments 54 scientists lose their jobs from NIH probe into foreign ties This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Professor Xiaoxing Xi Receives Andrei Sakharov Prize This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Top Scientific Organizations Call for Fairer Treatment of Foreign-born Scientists This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. Activists Including APA Justice Resist New "Red Scare" This is your News article. It’s a great place to highlight press coverage, newsworthy stories, industry updates or useful resources for visitors. More News The U.S. Constitution protects its people against unreasonable searches and seizures. Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of Americans’ and foreigners’ phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications. Information collected under the law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Given our nation’s history of abusing its surveillance authorities and the secrecy surrounding the program, we should be concerned that Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups - whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists. Learn more about FISA The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Growing out of the Watergate scandal when federal resources were used to spy on domestic political and activist groups, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter in 1978. As its title suggests, the law was created to “provide judicial and congressional oversight of the government’s covert surveillance activities of foreign entities and individuals in the U.S., while maintaining the secrecy needed to protect national security.” Soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the George W. Bush Administration began a series of questionable secret surveillance practices, including warrantless domestic wiretapping. Major amendments to FISA were subsequently made to legitimize and empower some of these secret operations. FISA was transformed into massive warrantless surveillance programs shrouded in secrecy, and Chinese Americans are disproportionately impacted. FISA Amendments Act of 2008 The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 was enacted in 2008. It added a new Title VII to FISA, authorizing targeting of non-U.S. persons outside the U.S.. Section 702 spells out additional limitations to such surveillance. It was specifically stated that the surveillance must be conducted in a manner consistent with the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution . Reauthorization of FISA Amendments Act in 2012 and 2017 President Barack Obama reauthorized the FISA Amendments Act in 2012 for five years before Edward Snowden made astonishing disclosures in 2013 about how the government manipulates its power to conduct secret, warrantless mass surveillance programs on U.S. persons in violation of their constitutional rights. Some of the subsequently known problems such as “about communications,” “backdoor searches,” “parallel construction” and “reverse target” are described in the blog titled “One Asian American’s Perspective on the FISA Amendments Act and Section 702. ” President Trump signed the FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act of 2017 into law. The current authorization will expire on December 31, 2023. Asian Americans Disproportionately Impacted No person of Chinese origin was known to be part of the 9/11 or other terrorist attacks. Section 702 has always been claimed to be a vital tool to combat terrorism since 2008. However, soon after Section 702 became law, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) declared that economic espionage is a major security threat to the U.S. and started publicity campaigns with China as the major culprit. In May 2017, the Committee of 100 presented a white paper, “Prosecuting ‘Chinese Spies’: An Empirical Analysis of the Economic Espionage Act ” by legal scholar Andrew Kim of South Texas College of Law. Among other disturbing findings, the study showed an immediate spike in prosecutions against Asian Americans in 2008. A series of innocent naturalized Chinese Americans in private industry, federal government, and academia were accused of spying for China, but all of them were subsequently dismissed without an explanation, much less an apology, from the government. Despite the heroic efforts of individuals to defend themselves against all odds, they and their families have already suffered devastating damages in legal expense, emotional trauma, and overall reputation. During the last reauthorization cycle in 2017, APA Justice set up a website APA FISA Watch to track the actions undertaken by the APA Justice Task Force and concerned organizations. Serious Constitutional Issues When the FISA Amendments Act was last due for reauthorization in 2012, little was known about the warrantless, mass surveillance programs because they were shrouded in secrecy. Today, we know that even the FISA court had sharply criticized in its written opinion (declassified in April 2017) that the government reporting efforts were lacking in “institutional candor” and represent “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.” This same FISA court has approved more than 99.5% of the government’s requests since the enactment of FISA in 1978. FISA and its amendments are not the only laws subject to misuse and abuse by the authorities in the name of national security. The magnitude of their adverse implication and impact has been difficult to assess due to the inherent secrecy and complexity. With what little that has been made public, we know that protection for privacy and civil liberty has been grossly inadequate under FISA and its amendments. The government must not continue to use innocent, law-abiding Asian Americans as “collateral damage ,” convenient scapegoats, or targets of racial profiling without accountability. “Traditional” FISA, which requires lengthy applications to the secret FISA court, was used in fewer than 500 cases last year. Section 702, which doesn’t require individual court orders, can cover orders of magnitude more targets: more than 230,000 in 2021. The ACLU represents Xiaoxing Xi, a Chinese-American physics professor at Temple University, who is suing the government over its dismissed prosecution of him for supposedly sharing sensitive technology with scientists in China. The lawsuit, filed in 2017, challenges the FBI’s baseless arrest of Xi and its surveillance methods as well as its discriminatory targeting of Chinese-American scientists. Learn more Xi v. United States A Warrantless Surveillance Court Battle FOIA Request 245561 to the NIH Days Since FOIA Request Submitted 738 foia2nih_20210802.pdf Download FOIA Request APA Justice submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records pertaining to the effort by the National Instututes of Health (NIH) to investigate over 500 U.S.-based scientists and researchers believed to have connections to China. The filing date of record is August 9, 2021. The assigned tracking number is 245561. The request covers the following records created on or after January 2011: Records containing statistics or data concerning the race, ethnicity, or national origin of scientists who have been “flagged,” subject to scrutiny, or investigated for their purported foreign ties, or records sufficient to show this information. Records containing statistics or data concerning the number of scientists in each of the following categories who have been “flagged,” subject to scrutiny, or investigated as the result of (a) NIH cooperation with law enforcement agencies; (b) anonymous complaints; and (c) stewardship of NIH program staff, or records sufficient to show this information. Records containing statistics or data concerning the race, ethnicity, or national origin of scientists in each of the following categories who have been “flagged,” subject to scrutiny, or investigated as the result of (a) NIH cooperation with law enforcement agencies; (b) anonymous complaints; and (c) stewardship of NIH program staff, or records sufficient to show this information. Records describing the methods by which individuals subject to NIH scrutiny or investigation were identified for investigation, including but not limited to NIH cooperation with law enforcement agencies, anonymous complaints, and stewardship of NIH program staff. We thank Yale University student Alex Liang for his research and preparation of this FOIA request. NIH Denial and Follow-up Appeal 202302228_ncca_statement_of_condemn_lance_gooden_20232028_final.pdf 2022/05/13 NIH: FOIA Case Number: 56843 2022/05/31 APA Justice: Appeal of FOIA Case Number 56843

The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology has protested the politicization and cancellation of an NIH research grant. April 6, 2020 The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) is an international nonprofit scientific and educational organization. With over 11,000 members, made up of students, researchers, educators and industry professionals, the ASBMB is one of the largest molecular life science societies in the world. Founded in 1906, the ASBMB’s mission is to advance the science of biochemistry and molecular biology and to promote the understanding of the molecular nature of life processes. On April 6, 2020, ASBMB issued a position statement on Foreign Influences to Research Integrity . "While ASBMB recognizes the substantial efforts undertaken by federal funding agencies, universities and research institutions to address the issue of foreign influence to research integrity, ... We must strike a balance between protecting research, while continuing to promote international collaboration. " the statement says. "Of particular concern regarding federal agency responses is the lack of guidance and transparency from the NIH. Since instances of foreign influence have come to light in 2018, the NIH has initiated thousands of investigations on scientists who they suspect of intellectual property theft, conflicts of interest, or peer review violations. While some incidents of research violation or intellectual property have been publicized, the NIH has not been transparent with the scientific community about internal changes to their review or oversight process. In addition to the lack of transparency, there have been numerous cases of scientists being wrongfully accused of espionage or intellectual property theft. Fear within the scientific community of being targeted as a result of race or identify has proliferated. The NIH must be transparent about their actions and processes and offer guidelines to the scientific community to appease these fears. " ASBMB has taken further actions to protest the politicization and cancellation of the NIH research grant to the EcoHealth Alliance. See more at NIH Grant Politicized . At the end of August 2020, several media reported a new grant was awarded although there were questions on the conditions possibly imposed in the new grant. The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology has protested the politicization and cancellation of an NIH research grant. Previous Next ASBMB Protests Racially Motivated Cancellation of Research Grant

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

Newsletter - #105 2022 Starts with a Bang; NSPM-33 Guidance; More on Lieber Verdict/"China Initiative;" + #105 2022 Starts with a Bang; NSPM-33 Guidance; More on Lieber Verdict/"China Initiative;" + Back View PDF January 10, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

United Chinese Americans (UCA) Raises Concerns For Chinese American Scientists as Collateral Damage in the Crossfire Between the United States and China Due to Deteriorating Relations April 25, 2019 On April 25, 2019, the United Chinese Americans (UCA) , a nationwide nonprofit and nonpartisan federation and a community civic movement, released a statement to raise concerns for Chinese American scientists as collateral damage in the crossfire between the United States and China due to deteriorating relations, including five appeals to address the current situartion. It was in response to the first wave of an aniticpated crack down targeting primarily Chinese American scientists at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. See links and reports about the MD Anderson story here. Link to full statement in English We call on the U.S. higher education and scientific communities to continue to uphold and strengthen scientific collaborations around the world so they may continue to benefit all mankind. We salute the University of California at Berkeley, Stanford University, the University of Michigan and the University of California at Davis for their efforts to uphold these principles and ideals as well as for their civil rights concerns for their faculty members and students, and call on more institutions to follow their example. We call on Chinese American scientists to continue to carry on the indispensable role they have played in maintaining America’s lead position in scientific research and global competitiveness. To this end, we fully endorse the strengthening of compliance efforts and ethical standards guiding scientific research and collaboration. We call on Chinese American scientists—indeed all scientists—to adhere strictly to all applicable laws, regulations and practices, and to cooperate in reporting any breaches to appropriate authorities. We call on Chinese American scientists – indeed, all Chinese Americans – to continue to strengthen U.S.-China people-to-people relations through scientific exchanges and educational efforts rather than retreating. An adversarial U.S.-China relationship is harmful to Chinese Americans, to the United States and China, and to the future of the world. Chinese Americans have a unique role to play as communicators, bridge builders and messengers of peace between the two peoples. We call on the Chinese government to earnestly protect U.S. intellectual property rights, as American scientists participate in its talent programs and other exchanges, and vigorously strengthen the standardization and transparency of those programs. The Chinese government should also improve its supervision and management of such programs, including sub-national ones, toughen two-way compliance requirements and enhance training to reduce or eliminate doubts and concerns other countries may have about such programs. Finally, we call on U.S. law enforcement agencies to strengthen internal training and safeguards to reduce implicit bias and discrimination, to enhance communication with Chinese American communities and to ensure that the freedom and civil rights of all Chinese Americans are rigorously protected. United Chinese Americans (UCA) Raises Concerns For Chinese American Scientists as Collateral Damage in the Crossfire Between the United States and China Due to Deteriorating Relations Previous Next UCA Raises Concerns For Chinese American Scientists

Newsletter - #286 Research Security; Stanford Faculty Letter; McCarthyism Today; HUAC & CCP Committee; + #286 Research Security; Stanford Faculty Letter; McCarthyism Today; HUAC & CCP Committee; + In This Issue #286 · Ground Research Security in Science, Not Speculation · Stanford Faculty Letter to Congress Opposing Revival of China Initiative · McCarthyism: Tracing Roy Cohn to Today's Political Climate · House Un-American Activities Committee and Select Committee on CCP · News and Activities for the Communities Ground Research Security in Science, Not Speculation On September 27, 2024, the Baker Institute at Rice University published a policy brief titled "Ground Research Security in Science, Not Speculation."According to the policy brief, international collaboration is essential for advancing science, innovation, and tackling global challenges like climate change and public health. However, geopolitical tensions, particularly between the U.S. and China, have prompted new U.S. research security policies aimed at protecting intellectual property and federally-funded research from undue foreign influence. These policies, such as the 2021 National Security Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33) and the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, focus on preventing espionage and intellectual theft but have also raised concerns about over-securitization, stifling openness in scientific exchange, and discouraging global talent.It is argued that while research security is necessary, the current lack of data and empirical evidence behind these policies risks undermining American scientific leadership and economic competitiveness. The chilling effect on U.S.-China collaborations and the fears expressed by U.S. scientists of Chinese descent highlight the potential for a brain drain and harm to the U.S.’s reputation as a global leader in science.To maintain scientific leadership, experts recommend that U.S. research security policy be grounded in evidence, uphold democratic values such as academic freedom, and avoid discriminatory practices. Standardizing research security across federal agencies, fostering international cooperation, and promoting research on security risks are essential steps for ensuring the protection of U.S. research while maintaining its openness and global competitiveness. In particular, Federal lawmakers should continue building on recent actions by Congress, the White House, and federal agencies to: · Stop all attempts to reinstate the China Initiative . Research security policy should adhere to the statutory language in the CHIPS and Science Act specifying that implementation should “be carried out in a manner that does not target, stigmatize, or discriminate against individuals on the basis of race, ethnicity, or national origin.” · Standardize research security policy and implementation across federal agencies . OSTP, federal funding agencies, and intelligence and national security agencies all need to establish common, transparent, and publicly-accountable research security practices. These practices should incorporate a due process mechanism and ensure objective evaluation, an appeal process, and consistent application of any corrective measures. · Promote “research on research security” to provide an empirical basis for new and existing policy . Data and analysis addressing the nature, scope, and scale of research security threats should inform future decision-making. Research security activities should also be identified, traced, and evaluated for effectiveness. · Improve research training for administrators, academic scientists, and industry leaders . Outreach and education about research security, especially in the academic sector, will improve compliance with policy and responsible international collaborations. · Develop an international community of practice for research security . Broad international collaboration on research security activities will help establish best practices, effective policy, and the wide adoption of common values of openness, transparency, impartiality, respect, and fairness. Read the Baker Institute's brief: https://bit.ly/3TXf5Ed Stanford Faculty Letter to Congress Opposing Revival of China Initiative On October 8, 2024, a group of over 165 Stanford faculty members sent an open letter to U.S. Congressional leaders to strongly oppose legislation that would reinstate the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) China Initiative. They specifically oppose H.R. 1398, which would revive the initiative in all but name, and request the removal of language from the House report accompanying H.R. 9026, the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2025” that directs the DOJ to reinstate the initiative.On September 8, 2021, a group of 177 Stanford University faculty members sent an open letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick B. Garland , requesting that he terminate the Department of Justice's "China Initiative." More than 3,100 faculty members of over 240 institutions from all 50 states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico endorsed the Stanford letter or sent their own letters. In February 2022 when the DOJ terminated the China Initiative, there was acknowledgement “that this [China] initiative is not the right approach to meet the threat in the coming years." Assistant Attorney General for National Security Matthew Olson said, “Instead, the current threats demand a broader approach.” The China Initiative was not the right approach then and it is not the right approach now.The letter emphasizes that while espionage and intellectual property theft are serious concerns, the China Initiative has been harmful to U.S. science and technology, especially affecting Asian American scholars and international students. The faculty members argue that the initiative disproportionately targets academia and discourages the flow of valuable international talent, particularly from China. They cite a National Academy of Sciences report, International Talent Programs in the Changing Global Environment , showing that the U.S. has been losing scientific talent since 2018, a trend accelerated by the China Initiative.The letter calls for a new approach that fosters international collaboration and talent, rather than pushing talented individuals towards rival nations. It concludes by urging Congress to welcome brilliant minds from around the world and maintain the U.S. as a beacon for freedom and opportunity, rather than being driven by fear. "We should strive – consistent with our history and our beliefs – to be the 'shining city upon a hill' that welcomes the brightest, most ambitious and dedicated students, scientists, and engineers from around the world. We should not be driven by fear and inadvertently push these talented people towards our rivals. If there is to be a 'China Initiative', let it be one designed to make clear how much we appreciate the influx of STEM talent from China and our dedication to their success in the United States. And for all, we must insiston the responsible and ethical conduct of research," the letter concludes.On October 8, 2024, the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) issued a strong statement in support of the Stanford faculty letter. Faculty members or senior staff at a US university are invited to endorse the letter to the leadership of the U.S. House and Senate at https://bit.ly/4eXkWBw . An update will be sent to Congress.Read the Stanford faculty letter: https://bit.ly/4dCVC2P McCarthyism: Tracing Roy Cohn to Today's Political Climate According to Wikipedia, Roy Cohn served as Chief Counsel for Senator Joseph McCarthy from 1953 to 1954. Roy Cohn played a major role in McCarthy's anti-Communist hearings. After Joseph Welch , an attorney for the Army, confronted McCarthy during the Army–McCarthy hearings of 1954 with the line, " Have you no sense of decency, sir? ", public opinion began to turn against McCarthy, leading to McCarthy's censure by the U.S. Senate, and the eventual end of the era.After resigning from McCarthy's staff, Roy Cohn had a 30-year career as an attorney in New York City. His clients included Donald Trump from 1973 to 1985.According to an audio book titled " Ruthless: How Donald Trump and Roy Cohn's Dark Symbiosis Changed America " read by investigative journalist Marie Brenner , Roy Cohn and Donald Trump first met in 1973 when Donald Trump was still trying to make a name for himself as a real estate developer while fighting federal discrimination charges against his family's business. After their chance meeting at a Manhattan disco, Roy Cohn went to work defending Trump, starting a business and personal association that endured in various forms until Roy Cohn's death in 1986.“You knew when you were in Cohn’s presence you were in the presence of pure evil,” said lawyer Victor A. Kovner , who had known him for years. Roy Cohn’s power derived largely from his ability to scare potential adversaries with hollow threats and spurious lawsuits. And the fee he demanded for his services? Ironclad loyalty. According to Marie Brenner, more than legal representation, Roy Cohn offered Donald Trump a way of seeing the world - and the opportunities for seeking advantage within it - that still inform Donald Trump's approach to politics and governing today.2018/08/21 Marie Brenner: Ruthless: How Donald Trump and Roy Cohn's Dark Symbiosis Changed America (audio book)2017/06/28 Vanity Fair : How Donald Trump and Roy Cohn’s Ruthless Symbiosis Changed America The Apprentice Movie On October 11, 2024, The Apprentice movie will premiere in theaters.According to BBC , ABC News (Australian) , Entertainment Weekly , New Yorker , and multiple media reports, The Apprentice is a shrewd and darkly amusing tragicomedy that dramatizes Donald Trump 's rise to fame and fortune in the 1970s and 80s. While the movie begins with a disclaimer that many of its events are fictionalized, the former president has threatened to take legal action.In the movie, Donald Trump is first seen as a young man in the early 1970s. He works for the New York real estate company run by his cold and condescending father Fred Trump , knocking on doors and collecting rent from his impoverished tenants, but he dreams of opening a luxury high-rise hotel near Central Station. The only snag is that the company is being sued over its racial profiling of potential renters. "How can I be racist when I've got a black driver?" splutters Fred Trump.Enter Roy Cohn in the movie, a notoriously vicious and unscrupulous lawyer who catches Donald Trump's eye in a swanky members club. Donald Trump is spellbound by Roy Cohn's rudeness, his contempt for his opponents, and his three rules for success: always attack , never admit to any wrongdoing , and never admit defeat . The fact that he is so open about using blackmail only adds to his lustre in Donald Trump's eyes. Roy Cohn could be the encouraging father figure that Donald Trump has always lacked. Media reports: 2024/10/05 ABC News (Australia) : Donald Trump didn't want The Apprentice released before the US election. It's coming to cinemas this week 2024/09/24 PBS : ‘All About the Fight’: How Donald Trump Developed His Political Playbook 2024/05/22 Yahoo News : Who Was Roy Cohn and What Was His Relationship With Donald Trump? 2023/06/17 NPR : Trump has had a lot of lawyers but still longs for his wartime consigliere 2020/06/18 Men's Health : You Can Blame Roy Cohn for Donald Trump’s Political Rise 2020/03/05 AllThatsInteresting : Roy Cohn, The Man Who Taught Donald Trump Everything He Knows 2019/09/19 Politico : The Final Lesson Donald Trump Never Learned From Roy Cohn 2019/03/12 History : Roy Cohn: From ‘Red Scare’ Prosecutor to Donald Trump’s Mentor House Un-American Activities Committee and Select Committee on CCP According to ChatGPT, both the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) have operated in environments marked by national security fears, whether related to communism or China. Both are seen as necessary by some to protect U.S. interests, but they also raise concerns about overreach, civil liberties, and the potential targeting of specific groups. How the Select Committee on CCP operates in the long term will determine whether it follows in the controversial footsteps of HUAC or finds a more balanced approach to addressing national security.These are the key comparisons as identified by ChatGPT: 1. Mandate and Focus on Perceived Threats · HUAC (1938-1975): Established to investigate alleged disloyalty and subversion by citizens, public employees, and organizations suspected of communist ties. HUAC became a symbol of the broader anti-communist movement during the Cold War, heavily focusing on domestic threats and instilling fear of communist infiltration in American society. · Select Committee on CCP (formed 2023): Created to address national security risks posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), with a focus on China’s influence on U.S. politics, technology, economy, and its potential espionage activities. Its attention is on China’s global ambitions and their potential impact on U.S. national security. 2. Political and Ideological Motivation · HUAC : Driven by Cold War fears, HUAC’s activities were motivated by concerns over communism infiltrating American society. It fueled political battles, often targeting individuals based on suspicion rather than solid evidence of subversive activities. · Select Committee on CCP : While framed around national security, this committee reflects broader U.S. geopolitical concerns about China’s rise as a global power. It fits into a larger narrative portraying China as a primary economic and political adversary, raising questions about how much of its focus is based on security versus political rivalry. 3. Targeting of Specific Groups · HUAC : Its investigations led to scrutiny of specific groups like Hollywood, academia, labor unions, and government employees. Many individuals were blacklisted, losing their reputations and careers, even without formal charges. HUAC’s activities were widely criticized for fueling xenophobia and violating civil liberties. · Select Committee on CCP : While not yet reaching the level of persecution seen under HUAC, there are concerns that its focus on China could contribute to racial profiling and discrimination against Chinese Americans and other Asian communities. Critics warn that heightened political rhetoric could stoke anti-Asian sentiment, mirroring the fear and suspicion created by HUAC’s investigations. 4. Impact on Civil Liberties and Democratic Principles · HUAC : The committee was widely condemned for disregarding due process, leading to accusations of civil rights violations. Many individuals were subpoenaed, questioned, and blacklisted without sufficient evidence, creating a culture of fear and repression. · Select Committee on CCP : In its early activities, there are already concerns that its focus on Chinese influence could infringe upon civil liberties, particularly for Chinese Americans. The potential for increased surveillance, academic restrictions, and suspicion of people based on ethnic or national background echoes the repression seen during HUAC’s operations in the McCarthy era. 5. Public Sentiment and Scapegoating · HUAC : At its peak, HUAC capitalized on the public’s fear of communism, often scapegoating individuals as part of a larger anti-communist fervor. Many reputations and livelihoods were destroyed due to unfounded accusations. · Select Committee on CCP : The committee's formation comes at a time of increasing anti-China sentiment in the U.S., driven by economic competition, national security concerns, and technological rivalry. Critics argue that this environment risks scapegoating individuals and businesses with ties to China, reminiscent of the McCarthy era's unfounded accusations. 6. Legacy and Long-Term Consequences · HUAC : The long-term legacy of HUAC is one of overreach, fearmongering, and suppression of dissent. Its actions had lasting consequences for civil liberties in the U.S., contributing to a culture that discouraged free speech and mistrusted dissenting opinions. · Select Committee on CCP : The committee’s long-term impact remains to be seen, but if its actions prioritize security at the expense of openness and collaboration, it could similarly harm U.S. democratic values. There is also concern that its focus on China could strain relations with Chinese Americans and weaken international cooperation, just as HUAC left a divisive legacy in American politics. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2024/10/10 Cato Surveillance Week2024/10/10 China in the Heartland: Building a Balanced Approach2024/10/11 China and the World Forum2024/10/11 Reverse Brain Drain: A Threat to U.S.Technological Leadership2024/10/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/10/16 Rebuilding Trust in Science2024/10/20 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/10/25-27 Celebrating the 20th Anniversary of the American Studies Network2024/10/26 Common Ground and Banquet2024/10/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/11/03 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. Dr. Mark Xu to Lead IRS Statistics of Income Division On October 7, 2024, U.S. Chief Statisitician Dr. Karin A. Orvis aanounced that Dr. Weihuan "Mark" Xu just joined the Internal Revenue Service, as the new Director of Statistics of Income (SOI). SOI operates with an annual budget of approximately $40 to $47 million. It is recognized as one of the 13 leading federal statistical organizations in the U.S., responsible for gathering, analyzing, and publishing data related to tax returns and financial activities. Dr. Mark Xu is a seasoned Senior Executive with experience leveraging data science, AI, and advanced analytics to drive strategic decision-making and policy formulation. His expertise in economics, statistics, and leadership has yielded transformative results in both federal statistical and program agencies. His experience includes managing large, diverse teams and fostering collaboration and innovation in complex environments. He is a champion of data-driven decision-making, spearheading initiatives using big data, machine learning, and AI to enhance program efficiency and inform policy.Prior to joining IRS, Mark served as Director of the Resource Inventory and Assessment Division at U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Mark holds a Ph.D. and MA in Economics from the University of Washington, with advanced training in data science, machine learning, and AI. Mark has received multiple awards, including a USDA Secretary’s Honor Award in 2024. 3. USHCA Event Today and Professor Franklin Tao At the APA Justice monthly meeting on October 7, 2024, Min Fan , Executive Director of the U.S. Heartland China Association (USHCA), reported that Professor Franklin Tao will return to the University of Kansas (KU) and recognized at "The Heartland - Building a Balanced Approach" Forum in Lawrence, Kansas, on October 10, 2024, starting at 7:00 pm CT.This event, presented by the Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics at KU in partnership with USHCA and KU’s Department of Political Science, is supported by the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations and local Chinese American scholars.Join the event in person or online to engage in discussions on building a balanced approach to U.S.-China relations and to show solidarity and support for Professor Tao’s reinstatement at KU: https://bit.ly/3zkTyhT .To learn more about Professor Tao’s story, visit: https://bit.ly/3y8SBsm . A summary of the October 7 APA Justice meeting is being prepared at this time. 4. Drs. Chen, Hu, Tao, and Xi Honored by 2024 American Courage Award According to the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) on October 3, 2024, four distinguished Asian American scholars—Drs. Gang Chen , Anming Hu , Franklin Tao , and Xiaoxing Xi —received the prestigious 2024 American Courage Award from Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC. The award celebrates their resilience, leadership, and steadfast commitment to Asian American freedom and civil rights in the face of adversity. Past recipients have included the Honorable Julie A. Su , the Honorable Mazie K. Hirono , Vanita Gupta , Japanese American MIS Veterans , and other courageous Americans and immigrants. The first recipient of the American Courage Award was Dr. Chang-Lin Tien in 1997. Dr. Tien was the first Asian American to head a major research university in the U.S., serving as Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley. Dr. Tien was Dr. Chen's PhD advisor. Read the AASF announcement: https://bit.ly/4eSLwfa 5. APA Justice Newsletter Web Page Moved to New Website As part of its continuing migration to a new website under construction, we have moved the Newsletter webpage to https://www.apajusticetaskforce.org/newsletters . Content of the existing website will remain, but it will no longer be updated. We value your feedback about the new web page. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF October 10, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Contact Us First name Last name Email Message Submit Thanks for submitting!

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

AAJC and ALC have filed an amicus brief in United States v. Feng "Franklin" Tao, providing significant evidence of racial profiling against Asian American and immigrant scientists and researchers. August 20, 2020 AAJC Press Release On August 20, 2020, Advancing Justice – AAJC and Advancing Justice – ALC filed an amicus brief in United States v. Feng "Franklin" Tao (陶丰教授), providing significant evidence of racial profiling against Asian American and immigrant scientists and researchers. The two Asian American civil rights organizations submitted the brief in support of Dr. Feng “Franklin” Tao to show opposition to the government’s increased efforts to profile and target Chinese American scientists and researchers based on ethnicity under the pretext of ferreting out economic espionage. In United States v. Tao, Dr. Tao, a tenured engineering professor at the University of Kansas, is fighting criminal allegations for not disclosing to the University an alleged affiliation with a university in China. “Failure to disclose information on a university form is not economic espionage,” said John C. Yang, president and executive director of Advancing Justice – AAJC. “Xenophobia from leadership and agents within the U.S. government has translated to real consequences for the Chinese and Asian American community. Chinese scientists and researchers, like Dr. Tao, are caught in the Department of Justice’s broad net for prosecutions and sudden criminalization of minor infractions and we are deeply concerned with the pattern of misguided suspicion and racial discrimination we are seeing in these cases.” The government has been mounting a broad campaign scrutinizing and targeting Chinese American scientists and researchers through the China Initiative. Fueled by xenophobia, the China Initiative was adopted by the Department of Justice in 2018 for the purported purpose of combating economic espionage. The China Initiative is part of the latest wave of xenophobia against Chinese and Asian Americans and follows a long history of Asian Americans and immigrants being criminalized, stereotyped as “perpetual foreigners,” scapegoated, and profiled as spies disloyal to the United States. “The government needs to prosecute people who steal national security and trade secrets, but targeting people of Chinese descent for investigation without evidence of wrongdoing is not how to do that,” noted Glenn Katon, litigation director at Advancing Justice - Asian Law Caucus and former Department of Justice trial attorney. “Bringing dubious charges against people like Dr. Tao, for conduct the government would not have known or cared about but for the China Initiative, is discriminatory and a waste of resources.” We have seen a surge in prosecutions as the government increases pressure on academic institutions to criminalize previously administrative issues and federal agencies to increase prosecution efforts across the country. Data and individual cases of wrongful arrests and prosecutions along with biased rhetoric from public officials reveal that racial bias exists in the charging, prosecution, and sentencing of Chinese, Asian Americans, and immigrants. The amicus brief addresses the government’s broad campaign to scrutinize and target Chinese American scientists and researchers and discusses how the government’s xenophobic and overzealous prosecutions does real harm to the individual lives of Chinese and Asian Americans and immigrant communities. Read the brief here . AAJC and ALC have filed an amicus brief in United States v. Feng "Franklin" Tao, providing significant evidence of racial profiling against Asian American and immigrant scientists and researchers. Previous Next Two Asian American Civil Rights Organizations Submit Amicus Brief in United States v. Tao

Newsletter - #33 Call For House Hearing; S. 386/H.R. 1044; Anti-Hate Crime Hero; And Much More #33 Call For House Hearing; S. 386/H.R. 1044; Anti-Hate Crime Hero; And Much More Back View PDF December 10, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter