Xin Wang 王欣 Docket ID: 3:20-cr-00251 District Court, N.D. California Date filed: Jun 22, 2020 Date ended: July 23, 2021 Table of Contents Overview Five “Visa Fraud” Cases Links and References Overview On July 23, 2020, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the arrest of four scientists from China on claimed visa violation, including Dr. Xin Wang. A fifth scientist was arrested for similar charges in August 2020. Dr. Xin Wang was issued a multiple entry J1 non-immigrant visa on December 17, 2018. The visa application stated that he was employed by the Air Force Military University and the purpose of his visit was to conduct research neurology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). In his visa application, he stated that he had previously served as an Associate Professor in Medicine in the Chinese Army, also known as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). His listed dates of service for the army were from September 1, 2002 through September 1, 2016. He entered the United States on March 26, 2019. Dr. Xin Wang is alleged to have made fraudulent statements on his visa application. If convicted, he faced a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. On July 23, 2021, DOJ motioned to drop their case against Dr. Xin Wang. U.S. District Judge James Donato granted the motion to dismiss on the same day. A scheduled trial to begin on November 8, 2021, was vacated. Dr. Xin Wang was released from Santa Rita Jail in Alameda County, California. He had been in jail for the past year. The other four visa fraud cases were also dismissed at the same time. The five visa fraud cases including Dr. Wang were identified under the China Initiative, but they were removed from the DOJ online report after their dismissals. Five “Visa Fraud” Cases The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced visa fraud charges against four of five scientists from China on July 23, 2020. The fifth scientist, Lei Guan, was first charged in August 2020 for Destruction and Alteration of Records in a Federal Investigation with visa fraud charges added in September 2020. The announcement of the visa fraud cases coincided with the U.S. order to close China’s consulate in Houston, accusing it to be a "spy center" to conduct spying activities with local medical centers or universities. The five Chinese scientists are: Lei Guan (关磊) , Visiting researcher (mathematics), University of California at Los Angeles Dr. Chen Song (宋琛) , Visiting researcher (neurology), Stanford University Dr. Juan Tang (唐娟) , Visiting researcher (cancer), University of California at Davis Xin Wang (王欣) , Visiting researcher (neurology), University of California at San Francisco Kaikai Zhao (赵凯凯) , Doctoral candidate (machine learning and artificial intelligence), Indiana University These five visa fraud cases were abruptly dismissed by DOJ in July 2021 without an explanation for the dismissals. Wyn Hornbuckle, a Justice Department spokesman issued a statement that said "[r]ecent developments in a handful of cases involving defendants with alleged, undisclosed ties to the People’s Liberation Army of the People’s Republic of China have prompted the department to re-evaluate these prosecutions... We have determined that it is now in the interest of justice to dismiss them.” On July 22, 2021, Reuters reported that there was "recently disclosed evidence of a report by FBI analysts that questioned if the visa application question on 'military service' was clear enough for Chinese medical scientists at military universities and hospitals." In another report by the Washington Post, an unnamed official was quoted to say that "the punishment for visa fraud typically does not exceed a year. That fact, combined with the prospect of prolonged litigation in several instances, led officials to assess that the interests of justice were best served by dropping the cases." Upon further research, defense attorneys for Dr. Juan Tang filed a Defendant's Trial Brief and Memorandum Supporting Dismissal at Trial on July 19, 2021. It included a section on "The FBI’s Deliberate Failure to Disclose Critical Exculpatory Evidence to the Court and to the Defense Warrants a Dismissal of this Ill-Conceived Indictment." "There is dissension in the FBI’s own ranks," the trial brief started. It cited that the government intentionally did not comply with the discovery order for the trial and highlighted that "... just days ago, a heavily redacted report dated for release four months ago, on April 1, 2021, which the government did not disclose to this Court when it ruled on Dr. Tang’s Motion to Dismiss." Exhibit A shows a FBI Background Note dated April 1, which includes a statement that investigations and expert interviews "suggest that the visa application form (DS-160) potentially lacks clarity when it comes to declaring one's military service or affiliation." DOJ motioned to dismiss Dr. Juan Tang’s case four days before the trial was to start on July 26, 2021. On July 12, 2021, a partially redacted draft FBI report appeared as part of an exhibit in a non-motion response filed in the case of Lei Guan. The 28-page exhibit includes a draft white paper that provides assessments on seven cases under the "China Initiative," including the five that were dismissed. The draft paper states that targeting of the researcher and students "likely had minimal, short-term positive impact on the technology transfer threat from PRC students, scholars, and researchers." In addition, "[o]nly two of the arrests has a nexus to technology transfer violations, ... and none included charges related to other counterintelligence concerns." The operation "likely contributed to the deterioration of the FBI's delicate yet valuable relationship with some US universities by not exercising more caution before approaching PRC students." Although there was strong advice against investigating and arresting students and researchers with the operation, "several FBI field offices proceeded with visa fraud charges for individuals who met the criteria but did not meet the threshold for a high-priority technology transfer threat." "It is in the best national security interest of the FBI to strategically identify, target, and mitigate PRC technology transfer threats while also preserving educational opportunities in the United States for PRC students who do not pose a threat," said an unredacted portion of the FBI report. A footnote also stated that "the FBI does not consider clinical medicine an area of concern for PRC technology transfer." According to the exhibit, a FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst drafted the report as a response to a February 2021 award nomination. She was originally included as part of the award nomination but disagreed about the "high impact" the award's nomination claimed to have made. She did not think the arrest of the PLA students met the threshold for high impact at that time, as she assessed at an early stage the impact was minimal. The draft was a way for her to dispute the information contained in the awards packet. She removed herself from the award nomination. In December 2020, John Demers, former head of the China Initiative at DOJ, and William Evanina, former chief of the counterintelligence branch at ODNI, attributed without supporting facts and evidence that more than 1,000 Chinese researchers from affiliated with China's People's Liberation Army fled the U.S. after the FBI conducted interviews in more than 20 cities and the State Department closed China’s Houston consulate in July 2020. Some of the visa fraud prosecutions were based on photos of the individuals in uniform. However, wearing a uniform does not always imply military service. There are two non-armed branches in the uniformed services of the United States, including the Public Health Service which is a part of the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned Officer Corps which is part of the Department of Commerce. Previous Item Next Item

Newsletter - #81 DOC Internal Review Report; 09/13 Meeting; APS Webinar; Yellow Whistles And More #81 DOC Internal Review Report; 09/13 Meeting; APS Webinar; Yellow Whistles And More Back View PDF September 7, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #257 6/3 Monthly Meeting; Clear & Fair Law Enforcement; FBI Forum; China Initiative 2.0; + #257 6/3 Monthly Meeting; Clear & Fair Law Enforcement; FBI Forum; China Initiative 2.0; + In This Issue #257 · 2024/06/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · An Urgent Call for Clear and Fair Law Enforcement Guidelines and Procedures for Research Security · A Dialogue Between Academic/APA Communities and The FBI · Condemning Yet Another Attempt to Reinstate The China Initiative · News and Activities for the Communities 2024/06/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, June 3, 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: · Tam Dao , Assistant Vice President for Research Security, Office of Innovation, Rice University, will report on the future of the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Research on Research Security program · Haipei Shue , President, United Chinese Americans, will report on the 2024 Chinese American Convention · Jeremy Wu , Co-Organizer, APA Justice, will preview an alpha version of a web page on exonerated Professor Anming Hu · Anming Hu , Professor, University of Tennessee at Knoxville, will give an update of his situation and his family since the end of his ordeal under the China Initiative. 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 . An Urgent Call for Clear and Fair Law Enforcement Guidelines and Procedures for Research Security On May 27, 2024, Neal Lane* , Steven Pei* , and Jeremy Wu* posted a public commentary, urgently calling for the FBI, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), and other federal law enforcement agencies to coordinate their policies using comparable principles with the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and set clear, fair guidelines and procedures. The U.S. science and technology enterprise is unparalleled, and its contribution to the security and well-being of the American people is indisputable. In recent years, however, federal initiatives intended to protect American science and technology have strayed from their purpose and are rendering our nation increasingly unable to attract and retain science and technology talent – putting our competitive edge at risk during an era of techno-competition with key competitors.Our scientific success is rooted in core values, including collaboration, honesty, transparency, integrity, the fair competition of ideas, and the protection of intellectual capital. Some foreign entities do not share these values and are working to illicitly acquire our research and innovation. This necessitates laws – and law enforcement.But it is vital that law enforcement guidelines and procedures be clear and fair for maintaining public trust, upholding individual rights, and promoting accountability and consistency within the justice system. Otherwise, we can expect our competitive edge in science and technology to wane, as well as our standing as a leading democracy.The authors address the China Initiative which subjected hundreds of researchers to investigations, with none convicted of espionage, but instilling fear and confusion within academic and research institutions. Since the end of the China Initiative, foreign researchers, students, green card holders, and American citizens have continued to face difficulties at U.S. ports of entry. These incidents raise concerns about the criteria for secondary inspections and highlight a communication gap between policymakers and law enforcement. The U.S., long a leader in science and technology due to attracting global talent, risks losing this advantage if law enforcement does not follow clear, fair policies. This is exemplified by the declining U.S. share of top AI talent and a significant drop in Chinese students studying in the U.S., with China now educating more scientists and engineers domestically than the U.S.Protecting intellectual property and national security is critical. But these initiatives must be balanced with protecting individual rights, welcoming foreign talent, and encouraging international basic research collaboration. Otherwise, we risk repeating past mistakes. There is a way forward.With its sharp focus on research security, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) has set a balanced path to guide policies of federal agencies that support research. There is a similar need for the FBI, HSI, and other federal law enforcement agencies to coordinate their policies using comparable principles and set clear, fair guidelines and procedures.Given OSTP’s unique role and capability within NSTC, it should also coordinate with all key law enforcement agencies to close the apparent gap in communication between national science and technology policy set by NSTC and agents at the forefront of law enforcement. In doing so, it can protect America’s security and economic competitiveness while minimizing the unintended negative impact and associated chilling effects on the science and technology community. * Dr. Neal Lane is Senior Fellow in Science and Technology Policy, Baker Institute, Rice University, and Former Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy at the White House. Dr. Steven Pei is Co-Organizer of APA Justice; Founding Chair of United Chinese Americans; and Professor at the University of Houston. Dr. Jeremy Wu is Co-Organizer of APA Justice; Member of Committee of 100; and Retired from the Federal Government. Read the full commentary: https://bit.ly/4bVdN38 A Dialogue Between Academic/APA Communities and The FBI On June 6, 2024, the Baker Institute and the Office of Innovation at Rice University, the Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition, and APA Justice will co-host a hybrid forum titled "A Dialogue Between Academic & APA Communities and The FBI."In 2022, the Department of Justice ended its China Initiative — a strategy to counter Chinese espionage and threats to U.S. research security — after academic and civil rights groups raised concerns about bias and damage to the United States' scientific enterprise. Since then, however, reports of border entry issues have increased for Chinese academic researchers and graduate students.This event brings together Jill Murphy, deputy assistant director of counterintelligence at the FBI, and the leadership of the FBI’s Houston field office for a dialogue with members of the academic and Asian American communities. It will examine gaps between federal science and technology policy and its implementation — particularly in the context of law enforcement at the U.S. border. It will also explore the possibility of establishing a regular communication channel between the academic and Asian American communities with FBI field offices.Read and register to attend the open and free event in person by visiting this Rice University web page: https://bit.ly/4awKUsZ Register to attend the forum via Zoom: https://bit.ly/3wjg759 . For more details about the forum, visit this APA Justice web page: https://bit.ly/3wNL2Xi Condemning Yet Another Attempt to Reinstate The China Initiative During the House Judiciary Committee Markup Meeting on May 22, 2024, Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) delivered the following opening statement in strong opposition to H.R. 1398, the “Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act,” which is another attempt to reinstate the China Initiative. "Mr. Chairman, in 2018 the Trump Justice Department launched what it called the “China Initiative”. While it was ostensibly designed to counter efforts by the Chinese government to steal American intellectual property, the program ultimately had few successes. For nearly four years, the National Security Division brought a series of unsupportable cases against Chinese academics at the height of their careers. The government was forced to drop many of these prosecutions. Others failed in court. Even more were overturned on appeal. The China Initiative was born out of the understanding that a strategic priority of the United States is countering national security threats from China. Had the DOJ gone in a different direction from this starting point, we might be here lauding the successes of the “defend U.S. trade secrets program.” Instead, the Trump DOJ invested significant resources into targeting individuals of Chinese descent working in the United States, diverting crucial funding and personnel that could have been used to combat economic espionage and trade secret theft across the board. But the China Initiative did not just waste valuable resources. Rather than keeping Americans safe, the China Initiative divided workplaces, ruined careers, and contributed to anti-Asian hate. If you were a person of Chinese descent working in American higher education, you were a suspect. Rather than keeping America safe, the China Initiative divided workplaces, ruined careers, and contributed to Anti-Asian hate at the height of the pandemic, when tensions were already high. Many of my colleagues who served on this Committee during the pandemic remember the vitriol, the carless word choice, and the characterization of “otherness” directed at Asian Americans during that time. Programs like the China Initiative, with its explicit targeting of Chinese citizens working in the United States, only served to amplify these tensions. For many of us, the clear drawbacks and minimal successes of the program were obvious in real time, and I am proud to say that I opposed the China Initiative throughout its short existence. And I was glad to see the program ended in early 2022 by the Biden Administration. Unfortunately, this legislation, which would establish a “CCP Initiative” at the National Security Division, would simply reestablish the China Initiative by another name. My colleagues across the aisle have repeatedly suggested that without the China Initiative, we as a country are not being “tough on China.” But what the majority fails—or refuses—to realize is that programs like these are wholly ineffective at protecting our intellectual property. In fact, they do the opposite. During its four-year tenure, the China Initiative stifled innovation by discouraging foreign talent from moving to American companies and prevented Chinese researchers from accepting positions at our institutions of higher learning. We cannot quantify those missed opportunities. There is no way to know what inventions never came to be, but we can realize when we made a mistake, and move on. This bill would prevent us from doing so. I appreciate that my colleagues have been circumspect when talking about the national security threat posed by China. But it is imperative that we differentiate the many people who live and work in the United States from the threat posed by the government of China, not just in our words but in our actions. It is also concerning that this bill would reestablish a pillar of a program that was repeatedly used to target Chinese professors working at American research institutions.Countries around the world send their best and brightest to the United States for education and to perform valuable research in our academic institutions. But instead of welcoming their contributions to our economy and to our society, programs like the China Initiative encourage them to take their training and their talents elsewhere. In a September 2022 report by the Asian American Scholar’s Forum, researchers found that between December 2021 and March 2022, 42 percent of the over 1,300 faculty members surveyed nationwide reported being fearful of conducting research in the U.S. A further 61 percent felt pressure to leave the U.S., and 45 percent intended to avoid federal grant applications. It is foolhardy to punish China by harming American innovation, but by discouraging researchers from working here, that is exactly what we did. The IP Subcommittee has conducted several bipartisan hearings on the threat posed by the Chinese government’s theft of trade secrets. Democrats and Republicans agreed that there is a real, significant threat to our national security. But this Committee has more important things to do than revisit failed Trump-era programs. If anything, we should expend our oversight resources ensuring that the DOJ is not simply following the practices of the China Initiative in all but name today. This legislation would take us in the opposite direction. I oppose the bill, I encourage my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back the balance of my time." Watch Rep. Nadler's opening remarks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVlXiH1m5uM (5:05). Read the press release: https://bit.ly/3Kf1hjj ***** On May 22, 2024, the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) issued a statement to condemn the House Judiciary Committee mark-up vote of HR 1398 “Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act,” and all efforts to reinstate the discriminatory "China Initiative" program. HR 1398 would reestablish the "China Initiative"—a program that raised serious concerns of racial profiling and targeting of Asian Americans and immigrants, particularly of Chinese descent. The reinstatement of the “China Initiative” would have devastating consequences especially for Asian American scholars, many of whom had their lives upended as a result of the harmful Initiative. Gisela Perez Kusakawa , AASF Executive Director, said, "with this most recent attempt to reinstate the China Initiative, we are reminded yet again of discriminatory investigations that create a ‘living hell’ for researchers and their families. There is absolutely no reason for us to take a step back and reinstate a policy that has deeply harmed so many and led to a widespread chilling effect for our communities, especially during Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. While AASF has worked diligently to build bridges and foster trust at the federal level, we also closely monitor the work of our legislators and stand firm in our opposition to any attempt at reinstating the ‘China Initiative,’ including HR 1398. We will continue to work toward healing, trust, and academic equality for all, but this will not be possible if this Initiative is reinstated. Our country is made stronger when Asian Americans and immigrants are able to contribute freely without fear of discrimination or harm—and any legislation from Congress should be a reflection of that.”Read the AASF statement: https://bit.ly/3UXmljr . 2024/05/24 Foreign Policy: When Knowledge Stops at the Water’s Edge 2024/05/24 Tech Policy: When National Security Concerns Become Unjust: Preventing a Second "Yellow Peril" News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/06/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/06/06 A Dialogue Between Academic/AAPI Communities with The FBI2024/06/20 U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy – Teachers Workshop2024/06/20-22 Social Equity Leadership Conference 2024/06/27-30 2024 Chinese American ConventionVisit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. 2. Kei Koizumi on the Science Budget Kei Koizumi is the principal deputy director for policy at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Ina recent podcast from Issues in Science and Technology , he talked about his role at the very heart of US science policy. He discusses what he does at OSTP, how he got there, and the exciting developments in science and technology policy that get him out of bed every morning.OSTP does not provide direct research funding, like the National Science Foundation does. It does not run national labs, like the Department of Energy does. Its annual budget of just under $8 million in the last fiscal year is barely a rounding error compared with, say, the National Institutes of Health’s $48 billion budget.But OSTP does set priorities for how the federal government spends more than $200 billion on research and development. “That is a lot of leverage and power,” says Kei Koizumi, “and shaping that research funding helps shape the direction of research throughout the United States—and indeed the world, because the world does look to ‘What does the US think is important?’ as a clue to ‘Maybe my nation should be thinking about that as an important topic as well.’”Read and listen to the podcast: https://bit.ly/3UXGPbK 3. U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy – Teachers Workshop WHAT: U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy – Teachers Workshop WHEN: June 20, 2024, 7:00 pm ET WHAT: Online Webinar HOST: 1990 Institute Moderator: Ha-Yu Sebastian Cherng, Vice Dean for Research and Equity, Office of Research and Office of Diversity, Equity, and Belonging; Associate Professor of International Education, New York University Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development. Panelists: · Neysun Mahboubi, Director of the Penn Project on the Future of U.S.-China Relations, University of Pennsylvania · Susan Thornton, Senior Fellow and Visiting Lecturer in Law, Yale University Law School Paul Tsai China Center; Director of the Forum on Asia-Pacific Security, National Committee on American Foreign Policy; and Non-Resident Fellow, Brookings Institution. DESCRIPTION: T his workshop addresses the needs of the many middle and high school educators who are interested in deepening their understanding of U.S.-China relations, untangling political rhetoric from actual policies, and incorporating this knowledge into their teaching. This workshop will help attendees promote critical thinking, understand policy implications, augment current knowledge of U.S.-China relations, and build media literacy. REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/4bSemem Back View PDF May 27, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #149 Events/Conferences; Update on Arrowood; Hateful Trump Name-Calling; New from the Fed #149 Events/Conferences; Update on Arrowood; Hateful Trump Name-Calling; New from the Fed Back View PDF October 7, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #80 FBI Reports Behind Visa Fraud Case Dismissals; Concern Re Knox News Journalist #80 FBI Reports Behind Visa Fraud Case Dismissals; Concern Re Knox News Journalist Back View PDF August 30, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #75 5 "China Initiative" Cases Dropped; Combating Racial Profiling; Yellow Whistles #75 5 "China Initiative" Cases Dropped; Combating Racial Profiling; Yellow Whistles Back View PDF July 26, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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

Newsletter - #197 Special Edition: Florida Court Hearing and An Emerging New Coalition and Movement #197 Special Edition: Florida Court Hearing and An Emerging New Coalition and Movement In This Issue #197 This is a Special Edition to cover the court hearing on the emergency motion for preliminary injunction to block Florida's new discriminatory housing law and a new movement emerging from the protests and rallies against the legislation in front of the courthouse. July 18, 2023 - A New Movement Emerges Florida State and Local Leadership Meet The Attorneys for The Plaintiffs National and Community Organizations Support and Leadership Color Yellow, Playbooks, and Tracking Hate Federal Level Support and Leadership July 18, 2023 - A New Movement Emerges According to NBC News and multiple media reports on July 18, 2023, as U.S. District Court Judge Allen Winsor heard arguments for more than two hours on a motion to block Florida’s new law that prohibits Chinese citizens from owning land in the state, multi-racial, multi-state, and multi-generational protesters rallied against the legislation, slamming Gov. Ron DeSantis for the discriminatory measure.An unusually large crowd packed the federal courthouse in Tallahassee indicating strong interest in the case. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) lawyer Ashley Gorski said Florida’s law is extreme and amounts to blanket discrimination against Chinese citizens by equating them to the Chinese Communist Party. She said there is no evidence that Chinese nationals pose a security threat. “This law is unjustified, unfair, and unconstitutional,” said Gorski. “This is a highly unusual law,” she told Judge Winsor. “Florida’s law is truly extraordinary.”In June, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in support of the injunction. In the statement, federal attorneys propounded that provisions within the legislation violate the Fair Housing Act, as well as the Equal Protection Clause within the U.S. Constitution.The protesters, led by several Asian American civil rights groups, gathered outside the Tallahassee courthouse in support of the group of Chinese immigrants who sued the state over the law, which went into effect July 1. Echo King 金美声 , president of the nonprofit group Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA), which helped spearhead the rally, told NBC News that the law could have chilling effects. “This will legalize Asian hate,” King said. “People will have a reason — legally they have a law backing them up — to hate. … I can’t even imagine what kinds of hate crimes will increase.” Local Asian American groups were joined by several national organizations, including Chinese for Affirmative Actions (CAA), Stop AAPI Hate, United Chinese Americans (UCA) as well as representatives of the Iranian and Latino American leaders and out of state community leaders who traveled from Alabama, N. Carolina, S. Carolina, Tennessee and Texas to support the plaintiffs. In their suit, the plaintiffs, who are in part represented by ACLU, argued that the law is a form of housing discrimination and in violation of the Fair Housing Act.“Today we gather here to condemn Florida’s ‘alien land law’ and to reject the dangerous trend of anti-Asian scapegoating,” said Nicholas Gee , advocacy manager for nonprofit group Chinese for Affirmative Action, referring to 20th century laws , which were later deemed unconstitutional, that prohibited Asian immigrants from owning land. “This law is not just an attack on the property rights of individuals of Chinese descent; it is a stark reminder of the discriminatory practices of the past that we have fought so hard to overcome.” Protesters also argued that the “overbroad” law plays on harmful stereotypes portraying all Chinese immigrants as working for the Chinese government. “They have no evidence proving that these people coming from [China] and living in the U.S. have anything to do with national security issues,” King said. The complicated terms of the law, King said, could lead to racial profiling out of fear of possible repercussions. “There’s no clear definition,” she said. “This law subjects both buyer and seller to civil and criminal penalties, so the sellers will be very reluctant to sell to any Chinese people because they can’t tell if their house is in the restriction zone and they cannot tell if the buyer is from the restricted category. The law is very complicated and confusing.”Drawing parallels between the Trump-era China initiative — a security program aimed at addressing Chinese economic espionage that was heavily criticized for racial profiling — as well as then-President Donald Trump ’s “China virus” rhetoric amid the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, King said that legislation is likely to similarly stoke anti-Asian hate. She also noted that the legislation could have a larger impact on many groups across the Asian diaspora, not just Chinese Americans. Florida is among several states — including Montana, Arkansas, Idaho and Tennessee — that have considered or proposed legislation restricting Chinese nationals from owning land. But not all have been implemented.In Texas, a similarly controversial bill known as Senate Bill 147 died in the state House in May. “There’s people who are asking if they need to get out of the state, like right now,” Democratic Texas state Rep. Gene Wu 吳元之 , who represents a heavily Chinese district, told NBC News in March. “I have never seen the Chinese community this active and this motivated in my entire adult life. The community is inflamed right now. They are enraged.”Read the NBC News report: https://nbcnews.to/3Y3kzye Sinovision assigned two reporters to provide an onsite report (12:49), which covered four segments in Chinese: background and overview, inside the courtroom, outside the courtroom, and interviews with the organizers and protesters from diverse backgrounds, including real estate agents, a university professor, and local Chinese community groups from Alabama, California, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and others states 佛州政府限制包括华人在内的7个国家公民在当地购买不动产的SB264法案5月初州长德桑蒂斯签字成为新法后，居住在当地的4位中国籍公民和1家主要服务华人的房地产公司迅速提起诉讼，并向佛州北区联邦法院申请临时禁令。周二下午，法院就此案召开公众听证。记者邱洪辉和鄢田去到现场进行全程跟踪报道。 Additional media reports: AP News: Florida ban on property purchases by citizens of China and some other countries is challenged AsAmNews : In Florida, protestors rally against discriminatory alien land law bill CBS News: Florida's Chinese land ownership law debated News Service Florida: Chinese Land Ownership Law Debated ; Orlando Sentinel ; Tampa Bay Times ; Tampa Free Press ; WGCU Tallahassee Democrat: Florida's Chinese land ownership law debated in court as protesters gather outside The Capitolist: Federal judge hears arguments over Chinese property ownership limitations WPTV: Injunction sought against Florida law banning foreign nationals from buying land Photo Album: Readers are urged to send their photos of the protest to contact@apajustice.org so that they can be added and shared at https://bit.ly/3Q7SqEk Florida State and Local Leadership Florida State Representative Anna Eskam ani spoke at the press conference in front of the courthouse. Born and raised in Orlando, Rep. Eskamani is the daughter of working-class immigrants who came to Florida from Iran in search of the American Dream. Anna went to Orange County Public Schools and then to the University of Central Florida. She earned dual degrees as an undergrad and graduate student, works as a nonprofit professional and is now getting her PhD in Public Affairs.According to the Capitolist , Florida House Minority Leader Rep. Fentrice Driskell weighed in on the matter on July 18, stating that the Senate bill crosses the line from security to discrimination and should be thrown out by the courts. “How can Governor DeSantis call this the ‘free state of Florida’ when he’s interfering with the rights of a community to buy a home here?” Said Driskell. “We cannot give in to this kind of fear, hate, or bigotry. The Chinese people are not the Chinese government, and we must reject the unjust and un-American idea that they should be subject to a separate set of rules than the rest of us.” The press conference and protests in front of the courthouse were organized by Echo King 金美声 , President of Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA) , a 501(c)(4) non-profit organization whose work is to advocate for and advance justice and equality for the AAPI community and all Floridians, and Jenny Liu 刘洁 , President of The Yick Wo Institution 益和学会. Allegra "Ally" Harpootlian , Communications Strategist, ACLU, was also on the ground as part of the organizing efforts. The Yick Wo Institution is a new non-profit public policy organization registered in Washington, DC. The organization’s name pays tribute to the historic legal battle fought by a Chinese immigrant in the era of the Chinese Exclusion Act, eventually reaching the U.S. Supreme Court. According to Wikipedia , Yick Wo v. Hopkins , decided on May 10, 1886, was the first case where the Supreme Court ruled that a law that is race-neutral on its face, but is administered in a prejudicial manner, is an infringement of the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The landmark case ultimately led to the establishment of the fundamental principle that discrimination based on race, religion, national origin, and alienage is in direct violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Yick Wo was a laundry facility owned by Lee Yick. Lee Yick immigrated from China to California in 1861. After 22 years of managing the facility, provisions set out by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors said that he could not continue to run it in a wooden building. He continued to operate his laundry and was convicted and fined ten dollars for violating the ordinance. He sued after he was imprisoned in default for having refused to pay the fine. The Supreme Court held that while the law was not discriminatory, it had been applied with "an evil eye and an unequal hand" in singling out Chinese laundry business owner Lee Yick. The Yick Wo Institution takes on a new battle against Florida Senate Bill 264 with the same dedication of its namesake in addition to other issues. Meet The Attorneys for The Plaintiffs In addition to Ashley Gorski of ACLU who presented the plaintiffs' arguments and rebuttals, attorneys Clay Zhu 朱可亮 of DeHeng Law Offices and Bethany Li of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) were also present in the courtroom and spoke at the press conference. A full list of all the attorneys for the plaintiff, defendant, and amicus is located here: https://bit.ly/3QfUiL0 . Madeleine K. Rodriguez of Foley Hoag LLP, Robert S. Chang of Ronald A. Peterson Law Clinic of Seattle University School of Law, Gabriel J. Chin of UC Davis School of Law, and Rose Cuison-Villazor of Rutgers Law School are Counsels for Amici Curiae for 19 Racial Justice Centers, Affinity Bar and Professional Associations, and Civil Rights Advocacy Organizations in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction . National and Community Organizations Support and Leadership Dr. Sergio Lira , President of Greater Houston LULAC and Vice President of Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition (TMAC), and his wife Mrs. Maria Lira , Chaplain of Greater Houston LULAC Council, flew in from Houston to speak at the press conference. Sergio spoke in English and Maria in Spanish. Professor Steven Pei 白先慎 , Co-Organizer of APA Justice and Founding Chair of UCA, also flew in from Houston to support the protests. Nicholas Gee , Advocacy Manager, Chinese for Affirmative Action (CAA) and Stop AAPI Hate, flew in from California and spoke at the press conference. The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) issued a statement to support the Florida lawsuit and rally against S.B. 264, stating that "[w]e are proud that Iranian Americans will join and speak out against this xenophobic law, and we look forward to celebrating when it is overturned... NIAC emphatically supports these efforts in challenging and working to overturn xenophobic laws in the United States. Alien land laws from over 100 years ago had no place in the fabric of U.S. society then, and they certainly have no place in that same fabric today." Myriam Sabbaghi is NIAC National Organizing Director. Haipei Shue 薜海培 , President of UCA Chair, rode the "Freedom Bus" from Orlando to Tallahassee to attend the event. UCA released a Chinese-language report 全美华人维权代表聚集佛州首府听证会声援对SB264的起诉 , including a short video about the "Freedom Bus" ride.The National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) serves to eliminate housing discrimination and ensure equitable housing opportunities for all people and communities through its education and outreach, member services, public policy, advocacy, housing and community development, tech equity, enforcement, and consulting and compliance programs. It is working with a law firm, Relman Colfax PLLC, on SB 264 and alien land laws generally. Two attorneys from Relman Colfax, Reed Colfax and Zoila Hinson , reportedly attended the preliminary injunction hearing.National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) reached out to the heads of all of the NAPABA chapters in Florida and encouraged members to attend the rally, including four affiliate organizations in Florida - Tampa Bay, Southern Florida (Miami), Orlando, and Jacksonville. NAPABA is one of the 19 organizations filing an amicus brief in support of the preliminary injunction which was announced in a June 14 statement . Color Yellow, Playbooks, and Tracking Hate Participants were encouraged to wear yellow as a symbol of unity at the press conferences and rallies. In nature, yellow is the color of daffodils and sunflowers, signaling the advent of spring, bringing hope, optimism, and enlightenment. In America, yellow has been weaponized against Asians as the color of xenophobia. In partnership with the Yellow Whistle Project (TYW), the Committee of 100 (C100) distributed hundreds of Yellow Whistles with the message of "We Belong" for the event. C100 is a non-partisan leadership organization of prominent Chinese Americans in business, government, academia, and the arts founded by I.M. Pei 貝聿銘 , Yo-Yo Ma 马友友 , Oscar Tang 唐騮千 , Henry Tang 邓兆祥 . Shirley Young 杨雪兰 , and Chien-Shiung Wu 吳健雄 . C100 is currently chaired by Gary Locke 骆家辉 . Interim President and Executive Director is Cindy Tsai .C100 is leading the effort to develop "playbooks" on building a national network on media communications and legislative advocacy with Paula Madison , retired NBCUniversal executive, Helen Zia 谢汉兰 , Founder of the Vincent Chin Institute, like-minded organizations, and grassroots groups. In partnership with NAPABA, TYW, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Asian American Education Project, C100 is also urging the communities and the public to report incidents of anti-Asian hate. Reporting incidents of hate makes a difference. It helps lawmakers understand what is happening to our community and helps us get the resources we need to better protect you and others.When you report an incident to NAPABA, it will evaluate your submission, and if it determines that your situation may be suitable for legal help, they can provide a referral for appropriate pro bono assistance. Report incidents to NAPABA at https://www.napaba.org/page/ReportaHateCrime . Federal Level Support and Leadership On May 25, 2023, Reps. Al Green and Judy Chu , Chair of Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), introduced H.R.3697 - Preemption of Real Property Discrimination Act . The bill preempts at the federal level state laws that would seek to deny foreign citizens the right to acquire real property in the United States.Concerned organizations and individuals are urged to contact and express their support of H.R. 2697 to their congressional representatives (two senators, one representative, and appropriate committee members).Inquiries about H.R. 3697 may be made to CAPAC Executive Director Nisha Ramachandran at nisha.ramachandran@mail.house.gov and CAPAC Policy Advisor Casey Lee at Casey.Lee@mail.house.gov Read more coverage of the discriminatory alien land bills by APA Justice at: https://bit.ly/43epBcl Back View PDF July 24, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #341 Dr. Jane Wu; Class Action Injunction; Farmland Ownership; AI Summit; Affirming DEIA; + #341 Dr. Jane Wu; Class Action Injunction; Farmland Ownership; AI Summit; Affirming DEIA; + In This Issue #341 · Dr. Jane Wu's Estate Sues Northwestern University · New Nationwide Injunction Blocking Birthright Citizenship Executive Order · Agriculture Department on Chinese Ownership of American Farmland · ACLU AI Summit: Civil Rights in a Digital Age · Congressional Caucus Leaders Affirming DEIA as American Values · News and Activities for the Communities Dr. Jane Wu's Estate Sues Northwestern University Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications Associate, contributed to this report.According to the Daily Northwestern , NBC , South China Morning Post , and multiple media reports, Dr. Jane Ying Wu 吴瑛 's family, acting through her estate, filed a civil lawsuit in Cook County Circuit Court alleging that the Northwestern University discriminated against her and contributed to her suicide. She was a tenured professor at Northwestern's Foenberg School of Medicine.As a Chinese-born neuroscientist, Dr. Wu, a naturalized U.S. citizen, conducted influential research on neurodegenerative diseases. Her work was derailed following investigations by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) tied to her Chinese background, part of the defunct "China Initiative." During this period, her lab space, funding, and team were stripped, even after NIH formally cleared her after investigations from 2019 to 2023.Following the NIH’s investigation and Northwestern’s subsequent efforts to block her work, Dr. Wu suffered from a loss of vision as a result of a stroke she had under the stress of the investigation. She also experienced depression and obsessive behavior, but she was still able to work. In May 2024, Northwestern University handcuffed and removed Dr. Wu from her office, using her emotional disability as a “pretext” to evict her. The school then partially shut down her laboratory, dismantled her research team, reassigned her grants to white male colleagues, and committed her involuntarily to psychiatric care—actions taken without family consultation. Tragically, Dr. Wu passed away by suicide on July 10, 2024, two weeks after her release from the hospital.The lawsuit claims institutional discrimination based on her national origin, sex, and disability, citing violations of the Illinois Human Rights Act and seeking both compensatory and punitive damages.In an email, Northwestern University said that its heart goes out to the family, but it “vehemently denies” the allegations in the suit. The school “plans to file a motion to dismiss it before our next pleading is due in early September” and declined to provide further details on specific allegations.Following the one-year anniversary of her mother’s passing, Dr. Wu’s daughter, Elizabeth Rao 饶婕 , opened up for the first time in an exclusive interview on the devastating impact of her mother’s treatment on their family and her own life.Rao describes her mother as a melophile, enjoying a wide variety of music from Tanya Tucker to Taiwanese pop musician Teresa Teng , and Dr. Wu ardently enjoyed spending time with her two children.Rao’s fondest memories of Dr. Wu are of her as a parent. She describes Dr. Wu as the opposite of strict and demanding, through their various moves from St. Louis to Nashville, and finally to Chicago. In each of those cities, Dr. Wu “turned simple houses into warm homes.” Rao fondly recalls holding hands with her mother while watching movies or singing along to music during long drives. “She made sure that my brother and I had got not only a great education but also got to do all the stuff of a quintessential American childhood. Sports, road trips, dance classes, choir, you name it,” Rao said.Finally, Rao articulates the lesson her mother left with their family: “her upstanding morals and conviction to fight against injustice.”Dr. Wu's case highlights broader consequences of the “China Initiative” era, as it fostered bias and mistrust toward Chinese American academics. Her tragic death and the lawsuit by her estate bring attention to serious concerns about discrimination tied to national origin and gender, university responses to federal racial profiling, and the potentially catastrophic impact of institutional mistreatment on individuals' well-being. Gisela Perez Kusakawa , executive director of the Asian American Scholar Forum, said that universities must be places of “community, support and fairness, not fear and coercion”. “We urge institutions of higher education to adopt meaningful safeguards, to prioritise mental health, and to reaffirm their commitments to non-discrimination, justice, and fairness,” she said. “Dr. Wu’s story shows us how the effect of unjust investigations into Chinese American scholars does not just end careers, it can end lives. We stand with Dr. Wu’s family and all those demanding justice and systemic change.”Read the Jane Ying Wu story at this APA Justice web page: https://bit.ly/JaneYingWu New Nationwide Injunction Blocking Birthright Citizenship Executive Order Author: Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications Associate According to CNN , LAist , NBC , and multiple media reports, U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante of the District of New Hampshire issued a new injunction blocking President Trump’s executive order (EO) seeking to end birthright citizenship for the children of foreign visitors and undocumented immigrants. The lawsuit Barbara v. Trump (1:25-cv-00244) was brought on behalf of a pregnant immigrant, immigrant parents, and their infants and had sought class action status for all babies and their parents who would be affected by the EO nationwide. Petitioner “Barbara” is a citizen of Honduras living in New Hampshire. Petitioner “Sarah” is the daughter of petitioner “Susan,” a citizen of Taiwan. They live in Utah. Petitioner “Matthew” is the first child of petitioner “Mark,” a citizen of Brazil. Mark resides in Florida and is in the process of applying for lawful permanent status. Matthew was born in Florida in March 2025, and has received a U.S. passport. Mark’s wife does not have lawful status in the United States.The plaintiffs’ lead attorney is Cody Wofsy , the deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project.“We're asking the court to protect the constitutional rights of our specific class members who happen to be babies located all over the country,” said Aarti Kohli , executive director of the Asian Law Caucus, part of the coalition of civil rights groups filing the lawsuit.Laplante’s decision is significant, given the Supreme Court’s recent decision. Just two weeks ago on June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled to narrow the use of nationwide injunctions, limiting the ability of lower courts to block federal policies for the entire country while litigation is pending. Effectively, this made the Supreme Court the only court in the country with the authority to block presidential policies nationwide. While the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of President Trump’s executive order seeking to limit birthright citizenship, they did pause the order for 30 days, clearing the way for the order to go into effect in the 28 states that have not challenged it. This would create a patchwork system in which each state has different rules regarding citizenship. However, the Supreme Court’s ruling kept intact the ability of plaintiffs to seek a widespread block of orders through class action lawsuits. As Laplante granted class action status to the lawsuit, he was able to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the EO from being enforced against any child born after February 20. Laplante only granted class action status to the children who would be affected by the restrictions, not the parents.During the hearing, Laplante insisted that “the deprivation of U.S. citizenship and an abrupt change of policy that was longstanding … that’s irreparable harm.” He added that birthright citizenship is “the greatest privilege that exists in the world.”Laplante paused the order for several days, granting the Trump administration ample time to appeal his decision. Agriculture Department on Chinese Ownership of American Farmland Author: Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications AssociateAccording to the New York Times and the Washington Post , the Department of Agriculture released a seven-point national security plan on July 9, 2025, enhancing public disclosures of foreign ownership of farmland, enacting steeper penalties for false filings, and working with Congress and states to ban purchases of farmland by foreign adversaries. Agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins claimed that American agriculture is “under threat from criminals, from political adversaries and from hostile regimes that understand our way of life as a profound and existential threat to themselves.” Rollins points specifically to the ownership of American farmland by Chinese nationals, and she advocates for the use of presidential authority to reclaim farmland currently owned by foreign entities. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth spoke highly of the plan, insisting “no longer can foreign adversaries assume we’re not watching and we’re not paying attention and we’re not doing something about it — because we are.” Hegseth called the defensive aspects of the plan “common sense.” This follows a recent trend of growing concern over foreign ownership of American farmland. In 2023, the Senate voted to block businesses based in China from acquiring American farmland. According to a recently released report by the Committee of 100 , U.S. Congress is currently considering 15 such bills and 25 states have passed bills restricting foreign property ownership. Of the bills that have been passed in the 25 states into law, 2 bills single out Chinese citizens and prohibit non-permanent residents from owning any form of property in the state: Florida’s SB 264 (2023), and West Virginia’s HB 2961 (2025). At least two lawsuits have been filed against Florida’s SB 264: · SHEN v. SIMPSON (4:23-cv-00208) . A group of individual Chinese plaintiffs argue that SB 264 is discriminatory under the Fair Housing Act and the 14th Amendment, vague, and conflicts with federal law. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has temporarily halted the enforcement of SB 264 against the Chinese plaintiffs while the case proceeds. · National Fair Housing Alliance, Inc. v. Secretary of Commerce (1:24-cv-21749) . The National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA), the Asian Real Estate Association of America (AREAA), and others, allege fair housing discrimination. In 2023, foreigners owned nearly 45 million acres of farmland in the U.S., accounting for about 3.5% of all agricultural land in the country but a 70% increase from a decade earlier. Canadians owned about a third while China held 270,000 acres or about 0.6%. The Agriculture Department’s plan also includes a myriad of measures aimed to increase agricultural productivity and safety; only some are not concerned with foreign ownership. National Agricultural Law Center provides extensive information and resources on foreign ownership of agricultural land in the United States, offering resources like FAQs, legislative roadmaps, and webinars to help understand the complexities of this issue. ACLU AI Summit: Civil Rights in a Digital Age On July 10, 2025, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hosted its “AI Summit: Civil Rights in a Digital Age,” convening civil rights leaders, legal scholars, technologists, and philanthropists to examine how artificial intelligence is reshaping civil liberties—and how society must respond. Opening the event, ACLU General Counsel Terrence Dougherty traced today’s challenges back to the organization’s founding during the Palmer Raids of 1920, when the U.S. government targeted immigrants in mass warrantless arrests and deportations. Just as the ACLU then stood against unchecked state power, Dougherty warned that AI now presents similarly urgent threats—enabling new forms of surveillance, bias, and systemic inequality if left unregulated. Rather than embracing the Silicon Valley mantra to “move fast and break things,” the ACLU has built an in-house technology team to pursue a different path: ethical, transparent, and justice-centered AI. Dougherty emphasized that this summit aimed to bring together partners from across sectors to shape an AI future rooted in constitutional values and civil rights. In a fireside chat moderated by ACLU Chief Technology Officer Ijeoma Mbamalu , ACLU President Deborah Archer and Patrick J. McGovern Foundation President Vilas Dhar explored four central themes. It was followed by an afternoon session moderated by Marissa Gerchick , Data Science Manager at ACLU, with a team of specialists at ACLU. The four major themes were: 1. Balancing Innovation with Values : Innovation must serve justice, not just profit. Speakers urged civil society to actively shape AI, not merely react to it. That means centering community voices in system design and development, and reframing innovation to prioritize equity, agency, and dignity—especially for marginalized groups historically excluded from technological influence. 2. The Government’s Approach—Speed Over Safety : Panelists expressed concern that federal AI policy prioritizes rapid deployment over civil rights safeguards. While traditional laws like Title VII and the Fair Housing Act apply to algorithmic systems, their limitations reveal the urgent need for updated regulations. The shift away from federal oversight toward industry-led initiatives leaves a gap civil society must fill. 3. Bias, Inequality, and Civil Society’s Role : AI often magnifies entrenched discrimination—in hiring, housing, criminal justice, and beyond. The root issue is not only faulty technology but the systemic bias embedded in data and institutions. Civil rights organizations must fight for equitable access to AI infrastructure, tools, and education to prevent a deepening digital divide. 4. Building a Just and Hopeful AI Future : Looking forward, speakers called for community empowerment. Civil society must be not just watchdogs, but builders—co-creating technology that serves the public good. This includes public investment in ethical AI, grassroots innovation, and sustained legal and policy advocacy. Calls to Action The summit concluded with a series of actionable priorities for both internal ACLU efforts and broader societal engagement: · Community-Centered AI Development : Involve marginalized communities from the start—as co-designers, not passive recipients. Fund local expertise and create advisory structures that ensure ongoing input. · Philanthropy and Civil Society Responsibility : Fund not just oversight, but community-led AI solutions. Civil rights groups must lead in articulating a vision of technology that supports justice. · Stronger Legal and Regulatory Frameworks : While existing laws apply, new rules are needed to mandate algorithmic audits, transparency, and accountability. · Public AI Infrastructure : Invest in open-source tools, public data trusts, and academic partnerships to shift power away from monopolistic tech firms and toward the common good. · Ethical Innovation Culture : Shift from speed to intentionality. Evaluate AI through risk-based, mission-aligned frameworks that prioritize long-term equity over short-term gain. Watch the ACLU AI Summit video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul73KZfy5P0 (2:14:15) Congressional Caucus Leaders Affirming DEIA as American Values On July 10, 2025, six major Congressional Caucuses—the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), Congressional Equality Caucus (CEC), Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC), the Democratic Women’s Caucus (DWC), and the Congressional Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Caucus (DEIC) introduced a joint resolution affirming that diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) are fundamental to the American Dream and to our national prosperity, safety, and democracy. The resolution comes in response to growing attacks on DEIA programs and policies across the country. It calls on all levels of government, educational institutions, workplaces, and other organizations to uphold and promote inclusivity, remove barriers to opportunity, and ensure equal access to services and resources. "Every American deserves to have a fair shot at success, but for far too many in our country, this is simply not the reality. Millions of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, along with other historically marginalized communities, continue to face discrimination in housing, healthcare, education, and employment," said Rep. Grace Meng, Chair of CAPAC. "Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility is about building a future where everyone can succeed and thrive. We will not let this administration sow division and roll back the progress we have made to ensure equal opportunity for all." On May 21, 2025, Senator Mazie Hirono led 11 of her Senate colleagues, including every Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in introducing Senate Resolution 240 reaffirming the importance of DEIA as fundamental values in the United States. “Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility are fundamental to our country’s history and culture,” said Senator Hirono. “Our diversity is one of our nation’s greatest strengths, as Americans from different backgrounds come together to move their communities and our country forward. As Donald Trump and Republicans attack marginalized communities across the country and attempt to erase their contributions from our shared history, I’m proud to lead this resolution reaffirming the importance of these values that truly make our nation great.” News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/07/25-27 Asian American Pioneer Medal Symposium and Ceremony 2025/07/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/07/29 C100 Conversations – “Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes” with Linda Chao Yang2025/07/29 From Heartland to Mainland: 2025 Future Ag Leaders Delegation2025/08/02-07 2025 Joint Statistical Meetings2025/08/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/08/10 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. From Heartland to Mainland: 2025 Future Ag Leaders Delegation WHAT: From Heartland to Mainland: 2025 Future Ag Leaders Delegation WHEN: July 29, 2025, 7:00 pm - 8:00 pm CT WHERE: Webinar HOST: US Heartland China Association Speakers: · Morgan Barba , Kansas State University · Imani Murphy , Tuskegee University · Parker Havard , Michigan State University · Samuel Martin , Iowa State University · Lauren Thornhill , Ohio State University · Nathan Unruh , Dickerson State University DESCRIPTION: As participants of the recent trip organized by USHCA, these delegates had a front-row-seat opportunity to observe and explore the impact of U.S.-China collaboration around agriculture as they visited Beijing and Zhengzhou, capital city of Henan Province. Hear the firsthand experiences of students as they delve into the complexities and opportunities in U.S.-China agricultural collaboration and the realities of on the ground engagement. REGISTRATION : https://bit.ly/46GqqzN # # # 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 July 14, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #138 Oppose US Attorney Nomination; Racist Image; The China Trap; 8/1 Meeting Summary; More #138 Oppose US Attorney Nomination; Racist Image; The China Trap; 8/1 Meeting Summary; More Back View PDF August 22, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #258 6/3 Monthly Meeting; Chinese Students; Clear&Fair Law Enforcement; 6/6 Forum with FBI+ #258 6/3 Monthly Meeting; Chinese Students; Clear&Fair Law Enforcement; 6/6 Forum with FBI+ In This Issue #258 · 2024/06/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Bloomberg: Expulsions of Chinese Students Spread Confusion from Yale to UVA · An Urgent Call for Clear and Fair Law Enforcement Guidelines and Procedures for Research Security · 06/06: An Open and Public Community Forum with The FBI · News and Activities for the Communities 2024/06/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, June 3, 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: · Tam Dao , Assistant Vice President for Research Security, Office of Innovation, Rice University, will report on the future of the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Research on Research Security program · Haipei Shue , President, United Chinese Americans, will report on the 2024 Chinese American Convention · Jeremy Wu , Co-Organizer, APA Justice, will preview an alpha version of a web page on the story of exonerated Professor Anming Hu · Anming Hu , Professor, University of Tennessee at Knoxville, will give an update of his situation and his family since the end of his ordeal under the China Initiative. 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 . Bloomberg: Expulsions of Chinese Students Spread Confusion from Yale to UVA According to Bloomberg on May 29, 2024, Customs agents at US airports have barred entry to at least 20 students and scholars with valid visas since November in ‘more insidious’ version of disbanded China Initiative. Susan , a second-year Ph.D. student in biomedical imaging at the University of Virginia, faced relentless questioning from a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agent upon her return from visiting her parents in China. Accused of ties to the Chinese Communist Party, her student visa was abruptly canceled, forcing her to purchase a $1,400 ticket back to Beijing and barring her from the U.S. for five years. Her experience is part of a broader trend where at least 20 Chinese students from prestigious universities have had their visas revoked since November. The Chinese government and lawyers confirmed these accounts, highlighting the lack of transparency and public accountability in these decisions. These actions contradict the efforts to foster educational and cultural exchanges endorsed by U.S. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping .The expulsions reveal internal divisions within the Biden administration, where Customs agents under the Department of Homeland Security are canceling visas approved by the State Department. The Biden administration ended the controversial China Initiative but has continued similar practices covertly, impacting Ph.D. students and researchers without public scrutiny. Susan and others, like Meng Fei , a fifth-year Ph.D. student at Yale, have faced racial and gender discrimination, with their exclusions linked to vague national security concerns under Presidential Proclamation (PP) 10043 . This proclamation targets students with alleged ties to Chinese military-civil fusion, yet the specifics remain undisclosed, causing confusion and fear among affected students. Universities like the University of Virginia and Yale are striving to support their students by seeking clarity and providing legal assistance. However, the ongoing lack of clear guidelines and coordination between federal agencies leaves many students in limbo, disrupting their academic and personal lives. As the U.S. grapples with balancing national security and academic freedom, the impact on foreign-born researchers like Susan underscores the need for transparent and consistent policies to ensure fairness and uphold the integrity of educational exchanges. Two years ago, the Biden administration ended a controversial Trump-era policy known as the China Initiative that purported to root out spies but resulted in more ruined careers than successful prosecutions. Now that program has been succeeded by a piecemeal effort — one that’s largely hidden from public view. Instead of targeting prominent academics, Customs agents are expelling Ph.D. and postdoctoral students, as well as company employees, by secret administrative actions with no public accountability or right to appeal. Marta Meng , founder of the Meng Law Group in Covina, California, who represents Susan and three other expelled students seeking to overturn their bans, said no reason was given to her clients or in transcripts of the airport interviews that she has reviewed. Dan Berger , Meng Fei's lawyer, said he can’t understand why his client would have been subject to PP 10043, as nothing in her background indicates ties to any of the banned universities or to state funding, and her visa was renewed by the State Department just last year. That’s a problem for learning institutions, said Toby Smith , who handles government relations and public policy at the Association of American Universities, which acts on behalf of 71 research universities including the University of Virginia, Yale and other schools with recently banned students. “Despite asking for additional clarity, the specific items that would result in visa denial for Chinese graduate students under Proclamation 10043 have never been disclosed to our universities,” he said. “So we have been left only to speculate as to what might spark such denials.” The secrecy makes what’s going on “much more insidious now,” said Gisela Perez Kusakawa , executive director of the Asian American Scholar Forum , a nonprofit organization that promotes academic freedom. “The end of the China Initiative wasn’t the end, they’re just not calling it that anymore,” said Ivan Kanapathy , senior vice president at Beacon Global Strategies, a national security advisory firm in Washington, and a former National Security Council official in the Trump administration. When the Biden administration ended the China Initiative, it said that a 2021 national security memorandum about vetting foreign students would remain in effect. It instructs the State Department to work with Homeland Security to ensure that the granting of visas reflects “the changing nature of risks” to US research. But it doesn’t specify what those risks are or how the agencies should be coordinating enforcement. “The question is, who is coordinating the whole thing, the guidelines and procedures for law enforcement,” said Steven Pei , an electrical engineering professor at the University of Houston and co-organizer of the Asian Pacific American Justice Task Force , which advocates against racial discrimination. “We are trying hard to balance national security, US competitiveness with China in high tech and civil rights,” he said. “But this top-level policy has not trickled down.”Read the Bloomberg report: https://bloom.bg/3wRL4O3 An Urgent Call for Clear and Fair Law Enforcement Guidelines and Procedures for Research Security Neal Lane* , Steven Pei* , and Jeremy Wu* posted a public commentary, calling for the FBI, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), and other federal law enforcement agencies to coordinate their policies using comparable principles and set clear, fair guidelines and procedures. Our scientific success is rooted in core values, including collaboration, honesty, transparency, integrity, the fair competition of ideas, and the protection of intellectual capital. Some foreign entities do not share these values and are working to illicitly acquire our research and innovation. This necessitates laws – and law enforcement.But it is vital that law enforcement guidelines and procedures be clear and fair for maintaining public trust, upholding individual rights, and promoting accountability and consistency within the justice system. Otherwise, we can expect our competitive edge in science and technology to wane, as well as our standing as a leading democracy.With its sharp focus on research security, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) has set a balanced path to guide policies of federal agencies that support research. There is a similar need for the FBI, HSI, and other federal law enforcement agencies to coordinate their policies using comparable principles and set clear, fair guidelines and procedures.Given OSTP’s unique role and capability within the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), it should also coordinate with all key law enforcement agencies to close the apparent gap in communication between national science and technology policy set by NSTC and agents at the forefront of law enforcement. In doing so, it can protect America’s security and economic competitiveness while minimizing the unintended negative impact and associated chilling effects on the science and technology community. * Dr. Neal Lane is Senior Fellow in Science and Technology Policy, Baker Institute, Rice University, and Former Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy at the White House. Dr. Steven Pei is Co-Organizer of APA Justice; Founding Chair of United Chinese Americans; and Professor at the University of Houston. Dr. Jeremy Wu is Co-Organizer of APA Justice; Member of Committee of 100; and Retired from the Federal Government. Read the full commentary: https://bit.ly/3yDRaSB 06/06: An Open and Public Community Forum with The FBI On June 6, 2024, the Baker Institute and the Office of Innovation at Rice University, the Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition, and APA Justice will co-host a hybrid forum titled " A Dialogue Between the Academic and Asian American Communities and the FBI ." Registration for in-person attendance and Zoom webinar is now open. In 2022, the Department of Justice ended its China Initiative — a strategy to counter Chinese espionage and threats to U.S. research security — after academic and civil rights groups raised concerns about bias and damage to the United States’ scientific enterprise. However, there were several recent media reports of border entry issues for Chinese graduate students and academic researchers who are green card-holders and even American citizens. This event brings together Jill Murphy, deputy assistant director of counterintelligence at the FBI, and the leadership of the FBI’s Houston field office for a dialogue with members of the academic and Asian American communities. It will examine gaps between national science and technology policy and its implementation. It will also explore the possibility of establishing a regular communication channel between the academic and Asian American communities with FBI field offices. Register to join the forum in person: https://bit.ly/4aFwvuK . Register to join the forum via Zoom: https://bit.ly/3wjg759 . News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/05/31 A Discussion on the History of Discrimination Against Asian Americans2024/06/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/06/06 A Dialogue Between Academic/AAPI Communities with The FBI2024/06/20 U.S.-China Relations: Untangling Campaign Rhetoric & Understanding Policy – Teachers Workshop2024/06/20-22 Social Equity Leadership ConferenceVisit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. 2. MOCA Forum: A Discussion on the History of Discrimination Against Asian Americans WHAT: A Discussion on the History of Discrimination Against Asian Americans WHEN: May 31, 2024, 6:30 pm - 8:00 pm ET WHERE: 215 Centre Street, New York, NY HOST: Museum of Chinese in America MODERATOR: Scott Wong. Reporter, NBC News SPEAKERS: · Christopher P. Lu, U.S. Representative to the United Nations for Management and Reform · Mark Takano, Member, U.S. House of Representatives DESCRIPTION: From the Chinese Exclusion Act and Japanese incarceration to recent hate crimes, a discussion on the history of discrimination against Asian Americans. REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/3yG2ltY 3. WHIAANHPI Celebrates 25th Anniversary On June 7, 1999, President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 13125 establishing a White House Initiative and presidential advisory commission dedicated to improving the lives of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Over the course of 25 years and five presidential administrations, the size and scope of these entities have evolved. But the full story of how they came to be has rarely been told. On May 17, 2024, The White House Initiative on Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (WHIAANHPI) posted a documentary video titled "Lasting Legacies - The White House Initiative on AA and NHPIs Turns 25” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9nw4TL80yI (10:29) 4. Two New Pandas Coming to Washington DC According to multiple media reports, months after the nation’s capital bid an emotional farewell to its giant pandas, the National Zoo is expecting a renewed surge in panda-mania with the announcement that two more of the furry black-and-white icons will be coming to Washington DC.A fresh agreement had been struck with the Chinese government, and a pair of adult pandas would be arriving from China by the end of the year. The incoming pair are Bao Li and Qing Bao. Both are two years old.Pandas have been a symbol of U.S.-China friendship since Beijing sent a pair to the National Zoo in 1972, ahead of the normalization of bilateral relations. Later, Beijing loaned pandas to other U.S. zoos, with proceeds going back to panda conservation programs. Back View PDF May 31, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #98 Letter to AG; NYT Report; "Chinese Initiative" Cases; 12/06 Monthly Meeting; More #98 Letter to AG; NYT Report; "Chinese Initiative" Cases; 12/06 Monthly Meeting; More Back View PDF November 29, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter