Newsletter - #153 APA Justice Comments; 11/07 Meeting; National Law Journal; Chemistry World; AAAS #153 APA Justice Comments; 11/07 Meeting; National Law Journal; Chemistry World; AAAS Back View PDF November 1, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #313 Amb. Gary Locke; 3/4 Webinar; FL SB 846 Injunction; NIH Turmoil/Fed Data Integrity; + #313 Amb. Gary Locke; 3/4 Webinar; FL SB 846 Injunction; NIH Turmoil/Fed Data Integrity; + In This Issue #313 · Remarks by Ambassador/Secretary/Governor Gary Locke · NFHA Updates; 03/04 Webinar on Alien Land Laws Opens · Temporary Injunction Against Florida Discriminatory Law SB846 · NIH in Turmoil; Federal Data Integrity Threatened · News and Activities for the Communities Remarks by Ambassador/Secretary/Governor Gary Locke Gary Locke 骆家辉 is Chair of the Committee of 100, former U/S. Ambassador to China, former U.S. Secretary of Commerce, and former Governor of the state of Washington. During the APA Justice monthly meeting on February 3, 2025, Ambassador/Secretary/Governor Locke expresses deep concern over the increasing challenges faced by the Asian American community, particularly Chinese Americans, under the current political climate. The worsening U.S.-China relationship has fueled harmful rhetoric, reminiscent of the first Trump administration, with terms like "Wuhan virus" and "Kung flu" leading to a surge in anti-Asian violence. While the U.S. may have legitimate policy disputes with China, Gary emphasizes that such conflicts should not extend to Chinese Americans, who have made significant contributions to the nation for centuries. From building the transcontinental railroad to serving in the military, Chinese Americans have long played an integral role in shaping the country.Despite these contributions, Chinese Americans continue to be treated as perpetual foreigners and unfairly associated with the Chinese government. The Trump administration’s “China Initiative,” which targeted Chinese American scientists under the guise of national security concerns, reinforced harmful stereotypes and subjected many to wrongful prosecution. Although the Biden administration sought to focus on restricting high-tech exports to China for security reasons, Trump’s recent policies suggest a return to broad anti-China rhetoric that unfairly affects Chinese Americans. This includes policies such as banning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, suspending foreign aid, and halting humanitarian relief efforts.Economic policies under Trump are also raising concerns, particularly the reintroduction of tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico, and China. While Trump claims these tariffs will hold foreign governments accountable, in reality, they function as a tax on American businesses and consumers. Companies like Costco, Target, and Macy’s are forced to absorb these costs, which are then passed on to everyday Americans. Gary highlights that nearly 60% of all shoes sold in the U.S. are imported from China, meaning the financial burden of tariffs disproportionately affects consumers and small businesses. The uncertainty surrounding these economic policies only adds to the challenges faced by Asian American communities. In addition to economic pressures, there is a troubling resurgence of discriminatory policies at the state level. Many states are now passing laws restricting land ownership by Chinese nationals, a clear throwback to the alien land laws of the early 20th century, which were designed to prevent Asian immigrants from owning property. Coupled with new restrictions on immigration, these policies evoke the era of the Chinese Exclusion Act, reinforcing systemic barriers against Chinese Americans. Gary warns that such actions represent a dangerous regression in civil rights, undermining decades of progress toward equality and inclusion.Given these mounting challenges, Gary calls for stronger, more explicit support from government leaders. Elected officials, from governors to members of Congress, must send a clear message that policy disagreements with China do not justify discrimination against Chinese Americans. The community should not have to bear the consequences of geopolitical conflicts between the U.S. and China. Gary stresses that public figures must actively reject xenophobic narratives and affirm the invaluable contributions of Asian Americans across all sectors of society.To combat these growing threats, Gary urges increased vigilance, organization, and collaboration among advocacy groups. Despite past achievements, the fight for equality is far from over, and Asian Americans cannot afford complacency. Gary commends APA Justice for its efforts in documenting and addressing these injustices, emphasizing the need for a unified, strategic approach to advocacy. Without coordination and collective action, the Asian American community risks being marginalized and targeted once again. By working together, organizations can strengthen their influence and ensure that the rights and dignity of Asian Americans are protected. A summary of the February 2025 APA Justice monthly meeting is being prepared at this time. For past monthly meeting summaries, visit https://bit.ly/4hyOV4i NFHA Updates; 03/04 Webinar on Alien Land Laws Opens During the APA Justice monthly meeting on February 3, 2025, Scott Chang , Senior Counsel of National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA), provided an update on the lawsuit National Fair Housing Alliance, Inc. v. Secretary of Commerce (1:24-cv-21749) , which challenges Florida’s SB 264, a law restricting property ownership by individuals from China and six other countries. Filed in May 2024, the lawsuit alleges that SB 264 violates the Fair Housing Act by discriminating on the basis of national origin. Unlike Shen v. Simpson, which focuses on constitutional arguments, this lawsuit emphasizes how SB 264 disproportionately affects individuals from targeted countries and was enacted with discriminatory intent, as evidenced by Governor DeSantis’s statements.NFHA filed the lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida. It was joined by the Asian Real Estate Association of America (AREAA), two Florida-based fair housing organizations, and an Asian American-owned real estate company. The plaintiffs are represented by civil rights law firms and advocacy groups, including the Asian American Justice Center. Florida officials initially sought to transfer the case to the Northern District, where Shen v. Simpson is being heard, but the judge denied the request. However, the case has been stayed pending the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Shen v. Simpson.Scott highlighted the broader implications of SB 264, emphasizing that such restrictive land ownership laws reflect a troubling trend of targeting immigrant communities, particularly those of Asian descent. The lawsuit aims to set a legal precedent to prevent similar discriminatory policies from undermining fair housing protections across the United States.Civil rights groups are closely monitoring similar legislative efforts in other states, assessing potential legal challenges. Scott reiterated the importance of holding lawmakers accountable for policies that perpetuate discrimination and reaffirmed the commitment of advocacy organizations to ensuring housing equity and protecting the rights of immigrant communities.On March 4, 2025, Scott will continue the discussion as a speaker at a webinar co-hosted by the Committee of 100 and APA Justice: WHAT: Fair Housing Rights & Alien Land Laws: Challenges and Advocacy for the Asian American Community WHEN: March 4, 2025, 4:00 pm - 5:00 pm ET WHERE: Webinar HOST: Committee of 100 and APA Justice Opening Remarks: Cindy Tsai, Interim President, Committee of 100 Moderator: John D. Trasviña, Former Assistant Secretary of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Panelists: · Hope Atuel , CEO/Executive Director, Asian Real Estate Association of America (AREAA) · Scott Chang , Senior Counsel, The National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) Closing Remarks: Jeremy Wu, Founder and Co-Organizer, APA Justice DESCRIPTION: With new laws limiting property ownership based on nationality, real estate professionals and advocates are stepping up to challenge these discriminatory policies. This webinar will provide critical insights into how these restrictions are reshaping the housing landscape and what we can do to fight back. What you will learn: · Your Rights Under the Fair Housing Act – Understand the legal protections in place to combat discrimination. · How These Laws Affect Asian Homebuyers & Real Estate Professionals – Hear real-world impacts from industry experts. · Community & Legal Advocacy in Action – Learn how grassroots efforts and legal challenges are pushing back and how you can get involved. Stay ahead of these evolving legal challenges by exploring Committee of 100’s interactive map , which tracks ongoing land ownership exclusion laws, and APA Justice’s Alien Land Bills webpage , where you will find the latest updates on lawsuits and policy developments. REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/3EOqGke Temporary Injunction Against Florida Discriminatory Law SB846 On February 11, 2025, the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA) 华美维权同盟 announced that a federal magistrate judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida has issued a recommendation stating that SB 846 likely violates the U.S. Constitution and should be temporarily blocked. Florida SB 846 is a state law that restricts public universities and colleges from employing Chinese students, scholars, and researchers, citing national security concerns. SB846 fosters discrimination against Asian American communities, undermines academic freedom, and hampers scientific progress. This is a significant step forward in the lawsuit Yin v. Diaz (1:24-cv-21129) filed by CALDA, the ACLU, and Perkins Coie on behalf of Chinese students and a professor. The district judge will make the final decision in the coming weeks, and in most cases, such recommendations are upheld. The enforcement of SB 846 has already harmed Chinese students, some of whom lost research and teaching positions, had their projects canceled, or were forced to leave their programs. Asian Pacific American (APA) organizations led by the Asian American Scholar Forum, United Chinese Americans (UCA), Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC, and APA Justice have been actively opposing Florida's SB 846 by making public statements and advocacy, supporting the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of SB846, organizing protests and rallies, and providing resources and explainers to inform the public and mobilizing community action and support. Local organizations such as the Florida Chinese Faculty Association, Graduate Assistants United, The United Faculty of Florida, and University of Florida's Student Senate are among many local groups that have been active and engaged. These concerted efforts strive to combat SB 846, protect the rights of Asian American communities, and promote equitable academic and professional environments.Read the CALDA announcement in Chinese: https://bit.ly/40UZ0l9 . Read the recommendation Order: https://bit.ly/42UDArg. Attorney Clay Zhu 朱可亮律师 , Co-Founder of CALDA, will give an update at the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 3, 2025. NIH in Turmoil; Federal Data Integrity Threatened As of February 16, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trump's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 74. Dr. Lawrence A. Tabak , the number 2 official as the Principal Deputy Director at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), abruptly resigned and retired on February 11, 2025. Dr. Michael Lauer , deputy director of the National Institutes of Health’s extramural research, announced his departure the next day,On February 10, 2025, twenty-two (22) state attorneys general filed a lawsuit, Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. National Institutes of Health (1:25-cv-10338) , against the Trump administration plan to limit how it pays universities and research institutes for “indirect costs” to 15%. According to NBC News , “ This agency action will result in layoffs, suspension of clinical trials, disruption of ongoing research programs, and laboratory closures,” the lawsuit says. “NIH’s extraordinary attempt to disrupt all existing and future grants not only poses an immediate threat to the nation’s research infrastructure, but will also have a long-lasting impact on its research capabilities and its ability to provide life-saving breakthroughs in scientific research.” On February 14, 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Angel Kelley , a U.S. district judge, granted the attorneys generals' request for a temporary restraining order, ordering the agencies not to take any steps to implement, apply or enforce the new policy. Judge Kelley set an in-person hearing for February 21.Two additional lawsuits have been filed at the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts against the NIH plan - Association of American Universities v. Department of Health & Human Services (1:25-cv-10346) and Association of American Medical Colleges v. National Institutes of Health (1:25-cv-10340) On January 30, 2025, U.S. Census Bureau Director Dr. Robert Santos announced his resignation mid-way through his five-year term. He was sworn in as the bureau’s 26th director, and its first Hispanic leader, in 2022. His last day was February 14, 2025. According to NPR on February 12, 2025, the Census Bureau removed access to key data following President Trump's executive order targeting gender identity, raising concerns over political interference and data censorship. The order, issued on January 20, led to a temporary shutdown of the bureau’s website and the removal of webpages related to research on gender identity and sexual orientation. Federal agencies, including the Census Bureau, were directed to eliminate materials promoting “gender ideology,” a term often used by opponents of transgender rights. This abrupt action disrupted public access to critical demographic data, hindered internal operations, and left employees unable to access essential platforms. Despite public outcry, the bureau has yet to provide an official explanation, fueling concerns about the integrity and independence of federal data collection.In response, over 230 organizations, led by the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics (COPAFS), the American Statistical Association, and the Population Association of America, issued a letter urging Congress to "demand the complete restoration of any federal data that have been removed" and work with the administration to "prevent any future purge or removal of data from federal agency websites and portals." Read the COPAFS letter on Protecting Public Access to Federal Data: https://bit.ly/41h0BTJ Advocates warn that suppressing data on gender identity effectively erases LGBTQ+ populations and undermines civil rights protections, including efforts to combat hate crimes. Experts argue that decades of research into measuring gender identity could be lost, reversing progress made in ensuring accurate representation in federal statistics. Lawmakers, including Democratic Representatives Mark Takano , Jamie Raskin , and Gerry Connolly , have called for an immediate halt to the executive order’s implementation, emphasizing the importance of recognizing transgender individuals in government data. Researchers and librarians have begun independent efforts to preserve the missing data, but concerns remain that the government’s actions set a dangerous precedent for political interference in public information. Experts also warn that the outright deletion of government records could have legal ramifications, as the destruction of certain federal data may constitute a criminal offense. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/02/18 Protecting Our Organizations: 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Compliance Virtual Training2025/02/23 World Premier of "Quixotic Professor Qiu" with Xiaoxing Xi2025/03/02 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/03/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/03/04 Fair Housing Rights & Alien Land Laws: Challenges and Advocacy for the Asian American Community2025/03/12 MSU Webinar on China Initiative2025/03/16 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/03/30 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/07 APA Justice Monthly MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. Lunar New Year Celebrations in San Francisco San Francisco’s Chinese New Year parade drew massive crowds on February 15, 2025, reinforcing its status as a premier celebration in the Bay Area Asian community, according to AsAmNews , KTVU-2 , San Francisco Standard , and multiple media reports. Acclaimed Chinese American actress and longtime San Francisco resident Joan Chen served as grand marshal, kicking off the festivities at sunset by lighting firecrackers at Union Square. The parade featured nearly 100 floats and performance groups, including an enormous dragon carried by approximately 110 people, not including side support.Newly elected Mayor Daniel Lurie participated as honorary grand marshal, and the parade stretched roughly one mile. "Welcome to the best Lunar New Year parade outside of Asia," declared San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu . "The oldest, most historic, and most amazing Chinatown in the United States is right here in San Francisco!" # # # 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 February 17, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #46 "China Initiative"; Twitter; US House Testimony; Webinars; Student Stats; Hate Crimes #46 "China Initiative"; Twitter; US House Testimony; Webinars; Student Stats; Hate Crimes Back View PDF March 1, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #319 NYU Shanghai; JACL et al v Musk/DOGE; Birthright/SB17/Student Visa Ban; Mahmoud Khalil #319 NYU Shanghai; JACL et al v Musk/DOGE; Birthright/SB17/Student Visa Ban; Mahmoud Khalil In This Issue #319 · NYU Shanghai Receives Record Number of Applicants · JACL and OCA Join Lawsuit Against Musk and DOGE · Latest on Birthright Citizenship, Texas SB17, and Ban on Student Visas · Who Will Be Next After Mahmoud Khalil? · News and Activities for the Communities NYU Shanghai Receives Record Number of Applicants According to Washington Square News , a New York University (NYU) student newspaper, on March 12, 2025, NYU Shanghai received a record-breaking 24,000 applications for its class of 2029. This surge aligns with NYU’s overall admissions growth, making it the most-applied-to private university in the U.S. The Shanghai campus maintains an enrollment of about 500 students per class, with half of the spots reserved for domestic Chinese students from China, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan, and the other half allocated to international students, with around 53% from the United States and the rest from 156 other countries. NYU Shanghai’s class of 2027 received just 16,773 applications from 84 different countries. The campus’ class of 2026 received 16,059 applications and its class of 2024 received over 13,000. The rise in applications, particularly from Chinese students, reflects a growing interest in international education without leaving China.The university’s unique position as the first Sino-U.S. research institution in China contributes to its appeal, offering students opportunities for cross-cultural exchange and career advancement. However, while NYU Shanghai and other joint programs like Duke Kunshan University (an all-time high of 11,884 applications this year) have seen application increases, American student enrollment in China has sharply declined, largely due to political and visa restrictions. NYU Shanghai requires all students to study abroad for at least one semester, though some Chinese students worry about potential travel limitations. David Pe, Dean of Students at NYU Shanghai, emphasized the importance of encouraging more students from NYU’s New York campus to study in Shanghai, citing the growing need for global engagement. JACL and OCA Join Lawsuit Against Musk and DOGE As of March 15, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trump 's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 126 with two closed cases. The New York Times is tracking court rulings that have at least temporarily halted some of the president’s initiatives. As of March 15, 2025, there are at least 46 such rulings.On March 5, 2025, the Campaign Legal Center filed a lawsuit , Japanese American Citizens League v. Musk (1:25-cv-00643) , in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates, Sierra Club and Union of Concerned Scientists. The complaint alleges that under Musk’s leadership, DOGE has acted illegally to “slash federal funding, dismantle federal agencies and fire federal employees” to harming everyday Americans.JACL issued a statement that said: “Neither Elon Musk nor DOGE have the lawful authority to exercise the sweeping power that they currently wield in the federal government. However, since President Trump created DOGE and placed Elon Musk at its helm, Musk has exercised significant unconstitutional authority and taken control over our agencies and our funding systems. This illegal and reckless control over the federal government has upended the lives of countless individuals, both within the United States and abroad.” JACL Executive Director David Inoue said, “JACL joins this lawsuit to stop DOGE from making reckless cuts that will directly impact national historic sites under the National Park Service that are among those where over 125,000 Japanese and Japanese Americans were unjustly incarcerated during WWII. Regarding what DOGE has done thus far, OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates Executive Director Thu Nguyen said, “The reckless budget cuts at the Department of Education are a direct assault on Pell Grant recipients, student organizations, and AANAPISI institutions that are vital to advancing educational equity.” Sierra Club Executive Director Ben Jealous said, “We are taking DOGE to court to defend Americans’ ability to safely and freely access the landscapes that unite us.” Union of Concerned Scientists President Gretchen Goldman said, “DOGE’s actions have interfered with life-saving research and scientific collaboration on cancer, vaccines, extreme weather and more. They have pulled funding for job-boosting clean technology initiatives and fired civil servants who enforce laws that protect us from air, water and climate pollution.” Latest on Birthright Citizenship, Texas SB17, and Ban on Student Visas 1. Birthright Citizenship According to Reuters on March 11, 2025, a third federal appeals court has ruled against President Donald Trump 's executive order seeking to restrict birthright citizenship, marking another legal setback for the administration. On March 11, 2025, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston rejected the administration’s request to lift a nationwide injunction issued by a Massachusetts judge. This follows similar rulings by the 4th and 9th Circuit Courts, keeping the executive order blocked. Trump’s directive, signed on January 20, aimed to deny automatic U.S. citizenship to children born in the U.S. if neither parent is a citizen or lawful permanent resident, affecting an estimated 150,000 children annually.The 1st Circuit panel upheld the injunction, citing longstanding constitutional protections under the 14th Amendment and the 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark , which affirmed birthright citizenship. Chief Judge David Barron criticized the administration for failing to present a constitutional defense of the order, instead attempting to disrupt established legal precedent. The lawsuits, led by 18 Democratic attorneys general, San Francisco officials, and immigrant advocacy groups, argue that the order would harm states by reducing federal funding tied to newly born citizens. According to the Washington Post and multiple media reports, the Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court on March 12, 2025, to allow its birthright citizenship ban to take effect in about half of the country while legal challenges continue. The administration argues that these injunctions limit executive power and wants them restricted to only the states involved in the lawsuits. Critics say this would create legal chaos, forcing migrants to travel between states to give birth and overwhelming courts with challenges. The policy faces at least eight lawsuits, and four nationwide injunctions have already been issued against it. Opponents argue the order is blatantly unconstitutional, violating the 14th Amendment and Supreme Court precedent from United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). The ACLU and state attorneys general argue that the executive branch cannot bypass the Constitution and must pursue a constitutional amendment to change birthright citizenship. Judge John C. Coughenour , a Reagan appointee, called the order politically motivated and unconstitutional, and his ruling is now on appeal to the 9th Circuit, with arguments expected in June.On March 8, 2025, Stanford School of Medicine hosted a teach-in on Birthright Citizenship and the 14th Amendment. Watch the video at: https://bit.ly/421Nnux (1:04:27)***** Trump Offers U.S. Citizenship to White Farmers in South Africa As Trump tries to strip birthright citizenship, according to CBS News on March 10, 2025, he reaffirmed his offer to grant U.S. citizenship to White farmers in South Africa, accusing the government of treating them "terribly" and promising "safety" and a "rapid pathway to citizenship." He criticized new land expropriation laws as "racist" and a violation of "human rights," leading to the halting of U.S. foreign aid.White farmers, reportedly making up less than 10% of South Africa's population, own around 70% of South Africa's arable land. This concentration of land ownership has been a focal point in debates about land reform in the country. Elon Musk , who was born in South Africa and still holds dual nationality, took to his X platform and criticized the government in Pretoria, claiming his Starlink satellite network was "not allowed to operate in South Africa, because I'm not black." South Africa's Electronic Communications Act , which, since 2005 has regulated broadcasting and telecommunications in the post-Apartheid country, requires that at least 30% of a company must be owned by previously disadvantaged groups as part of the criteria to gain a communications license. Starlink has not applied for a license to operate in South Africa. Clayson Monyela , the head of public diplomacy for the South African government's Department of International Relations and Cooperation, replied to Musk on X, saying: "Sir that's NOT true, and you know it! It's got nothing to do with skin color." 2. Texas Alien Land Bill SB17 Hearing According to AsAmNews on March 7, 2025, the Chinese community in Texas mobilized in large numbers to testify against Senate Bill 17 (SB17), which seeks to restrict property ownership for individuals from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea due to national security concerns. While the bill exempts citizens, lawful permanent residents, and asylum seekers, opponents argue it unfairly targets Asian Americans, discourages investment, and echoes past discriminatory policies like the Chinese Exclusion Act and Alien Land Laws. Sen. Lois Kolkhorst , who authored the bill, defended it as a measure to protect Texas’ land and resources. Lily Trieu of Asian Texans for Justice contends there is no substantial evidence of foreign land ownership posing a security threat. The hearing on March 6, 2025, saw strong opposition, with testimonies emphasizing the bill’s impact on Asian American communities and Texas’ pro-business reputation. Debbie Chen of OCA Greater Houston warned, “This bill echoes historic anti-Asian policies... fostering discrimination and anti-Asian hate.” Another speaker called it a “job killer” that undermines fundamental property rights and economic growth. With Texas home to over 1.5 million Asian Americans, opponents argue the bill casts every Chinese individual as a potential adversary. The Senate Committee on State Affairs adjourned the hearing without taking a vote. 3. House Bill to Ban Chinese from Student or Research Visas According to AP News , Northwest Asian Weekly , South China Morning Post , and multiple media reports, a new bill to ban Chinese nationals from obtaining student visas is set to be introduced by Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV), reigniting debates over national security, racial profiling, and academic exchange. The Stop CCP VISAs Act seeks to block all student and research visas for Chinese citizens, going further than previous restrictions targeting specific fields. Moore's bill aligns with broader Republican efforts, including Project 2025, which calls for reducing visas from "enemy nations".Asian American advocates, however, call the bill xenophobic and counterproductive.Representative Grace Meng , Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, said that banning only Chinese students was “xenophobic and wrong-headed. We cannot give in to fearmongering tactics that will restrict the freedoms and economic opportunities that make America the envy of the world.” Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) also denounced the bill, emphasizing that Chinese students contribute to U.S. academia and democracy, warning, “Unilaterally cutting off pathways of study for Chinese students… will make our country less innovative and the world less safe.” Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) warned that security concerns should be addressed “with a scalpel, not a bludgeon.” “No policy should target individuals solely on the basis of their national origin,” Fanta Aw , executive director and CEO of Association of International Educators (NAFSA), said in a statement. Yangyang Cheng , research scholar at Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center, said the bill “should be seen as part of a broader effort to restrict academic freedom and hurt higher education in this country, to control what can be taught, which research projects can be pursued, and who have access to the classrooms and laboratories.” John Yang , president of Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC, denounced the proposal, stating, “We strongly reject this move to paint all Chinese students as a threat and caution against racial profiling based on geography and not fact.” Democratic lawmakers and civil rights groups argue that such bans harm U.S. innovation, education, and diplomacy, while increasing discrimination against Asian Americans. In a public statement , Asian American Scholars Forum cautions that legislation like this would effectively harm the talent pipeline of Asian American scientists, scholars, and researchers, thereby undermining U.S. leadership in science and innovation. Who Will Be Next After Mahmoud Khalil? According to AP News , Intercept , New York Times , Washington Post , and other media reports, Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil , a legal U.S. resident and former Columbia University protest leader, was arrested by federal immigration officials and now faces deportation. Despite holding a green card, Khalil was detained on claims that his student visa had been revoked, and later, that his permanent residency was being revoked as well. Permanent residents are entitled to due process before any revocation of their status. Khalil's wife is a U.S. citizen and is eight months pregnant. The lawsuit Mahmoud Khalil v. William P. Joyce (1:25-cv-01935) was filed in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York on March 9, 2025. District Judge Jesse Furman temporarily blocked Khalil's removal the next day, pending further judicial review on March 21. Khalil is currently being held at a federal immigration detention center in Louisiana. ACLU and NYCLU issued a statement that they have joined Khalil's legal team in filing a motion under the All Writs Act to compel ICE to return Khalil to New York, where he can have access to his legal counsel and family. According to a statement by the Asian American Legal and Education Defense Fund (AALDEF) on March 12, 2025, The arrest of Mahmoud Khalil is illegal and discriminatory. Its intended effect is to chill free speech and create a climate of fear among immigrants, chiefly Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim communities. In the 1950s, during the McCarthy “red scare” era, people with opposing viewpoints were labeled as communist and targeted for investigation, arrest, and harassment by law enforcement. In the past several weeks, ICE has raided Asian communities, seizing family members without warning, detaining and then deporting them. The new administration has weaponized the immigration system as a tool for policing and now political oppression, against many people who themselves came to this country to escape political oppression.The Khalil case raises broader concerns about free speech, racial profiling, and immigration enforcement that could impact Asian Americans, particularly activists and immigrants. His detention over alleged political affiliations—without criminal charges—mirrors past government crackdowns on dissent, such as post-9/11 surveillance of Muslims and the "China Initiative" targeting Chinese researchers. The case also highlights the vulnerability of green card holders, a status many Asian immigrants hold, as Khalil faces deportation without a conviction. If his case sets a precedent, Asian American activists, students, and immigrants could face increased scrutiny, government targeting, or restrictions on political expression.On March 14, 2025, AP News reported that Leqaa Kordia , a Palestinian from the West Bank, was arrested by immigration officers for overstaying her student visa. The Trump administration also revoked on March 5 the visa of Ranjani Srinivasan , an Indian citizen and doctoral student “for advocating for violence and terrorism.” ***** 2025/03/18 Stop AAPI Hate Community Town Hall on Anti-Immigrant Attacks WHAT : Stop AAPI Hate’s Community Town Hall on Anti-Immigrant Attacks WHEN : March 18, 2025, 7:00 pm ET/4:00 pm PT WHERE : Virtual Town Hall HOSTS : Stop AAPI Hate DESCRIPTION : ICE officials are raiding communities, businesses, and private homes. Asian immigrants are being shipped off to Central American countries. And millions of immigrants and people of color are living in fear of racial profiling, detention, and deportation. The Trump administration’s anti-immigrant agenda has put a target on the backs of our nation’s most vulnerable Asian communities — and we’re prepared to fight back. We’re bringing together advocates, organizers, and impacted folks for a virtual town hall on mass deportation and what it means for us. Register now to learn what’s at stake for immigrant communities and how different people are fighting for policies that protect our communities and our right to call this nation home. REGISTRATION : https://bit.ly/4iudJLv News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2025/03/18 Stop AAPI Hate’s Community Town Hall on Anti-Immigrant Attacks2025/03/21 Fighting Racial Profiling and the Criminalization of Academia in North America2025/03/26 Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within2025/03/30 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/04/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/24-26 Committee of 100 Annual Conference and Gala2025/04/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/05/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/05/11 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. 03/21 SFU Webinar: Fighting Racial Profiling and the Criminalization of Academia in North America WHAT : Fighting Racial Profiling and the Criminalization of Academia in North America WHEN : March 21, 2025, 4:00 pm-6:30 pm PT/7:00 pm-9:30 pm ET WHERE : Hybrid event HOST : Simon Fraser University, Labor Studies Program DESCRIPTION : Join us for an important discussion on the case of Dr. Anming Hu , a respected scientist who was wrongfully targeted under the previous Trump administration’s China Initiative. Dr. Hu’s case highlights critical issues of racial profiling, academic freedom, and the growing surveillance of scholars in North America.This event will feature insights into Dr. Anming Hu’s case and experience, the broader implications for researchers of Chinese origin, and the fight for justice in academia in North America. We will also discuss what universities, scholars, and policymakers can do to protect academic integrity and prevent future injustices. REGISTRATION : https://bit.ly/3Fd11SD # # # 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 March 17, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #242 Officer Angwang; CAPAC Update; Georgia Alien Land Law; What is Texas SB4? More #242 Officer Angwang; CAPAC Update; Georgia Alien Land Law; What is Texas SB4? More In This Issue #242 · AP Report on The Firing of NYPD Officer Angwang · CAPAC Updates from March APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Update on Alien Land Laws in Georgia · What is Texas SB 4? · News and Activities for the Communities AP Report on The Firing of NYPD Officer Angwang On March 20, 2024, AP reported that in a decision made public recently, New York Police Commissioner Edward Caban ordered the immediate firing of New York Police Department Officer Baimadajie Angwang 昂旺 on January 29, saying he disobeyed an order to submit to questioning by internal affairs investigators about the spying case against Angwang under the now-defunct "China Initiative." Federal prosecutors dropped all criminal charges alleging Angwang spied for China a year earlier. Angwang, 37, said he declined to appear before the investigators last year on the advice of his lawyers, because the NYPD refused to give them department documents ahead of the questioning that would have allowed them to prepare. Now he is considering taking the commissioner to court over his firing.“It’s extremely disappointing,” Angwang told AP in a phone interview. “I have to continue to fight, not just for me, for anyone who were wrongfully accused in the past who’s getting the wrongful treatment I just got at this moment, or any potential discrimination victims in the future. I will not give up until I find the justice.” Angwang, who also served in the U.S. Marines and was deployed to Afghanistan, said he believes he got caught up in the Trump administration’s effort to root out Chinese espionage across U.S. institutions, and alleges there were shades of racism targeting people with Chinese links.In firing Angwang, Caban chose a harsher penalty than what was recommended in November by an NYPD disciplinary judge who held a hearing on the firing and listened to testimony and arguments from both sides. The administrative judge, Vanessa Facio-Lince , found that Angwang violated department rules by disobeying the order to submit to internal affairs questioning. Facio-Lince said, however, that he should not be terminated, after citing his good record as a police officer and praise by his superiors. Instead, she recommended an alternate manner of Angwang leaving the department that would allow him to negotiate some terms of his departure, including partial retirement benefits. Angwang’s lawyer, Michael Bloch , said even the judge’s proposal was out of line with department disciplinary guidelines. Bloch said the maximum penalty Angwang should have faced was a 20-day suspension. Bloch said there have been many other officers who committed more serious misconduct and were allowed to keep their jobs, despite administrative judges recommending their firing. Angwang said it was ironic that the NYPD was firing an officer who immigrated to the U.S. and was supported by the immigrant community, when the department is struggling to make the force more diverse.“I just want people to be aware as an immigrant I served in the Marines. I went to combat. I went to Afghanistan,” he said. “I was able to become a police officer. I was able to become a community affairs officer. I was able to build a bridge between the underserved community and the NYPD, which never happened in the past. I gained a lot of support. And now, unfortunately, NYPD terminated that opportunity between the NYPD and the community.”Read the AP report: https://bit.ly/4ci2sv4 CAPAC Updates from March APA Justice Monthly Meeting During the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 4, 2024, Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), reported that CAPAC Chair Judy Chu , First Vice Chair Grace Meng , and Senator Mazie Hirono wrote a letter opposing language in the Commerce Justice Science Appropriations Bill that would essentially reinstate the China Initiative. Nisha is pleased that language is no longer included. There is some language about directing the Department of Justice to provide a broader, more general report, such as outlining all the efforts that would be undertaken to identify areas of potential PRC espionage efforts. Congresswoman Meng and her team are credited for holding the line on this issue. This has been a major priority for CAPAC. There have also been ongoing activities with Professor Anming Hu . A letter was sent to USCIS to get clarity on the way they work on prosecutions and individuals who have issues coming out of the China initiative. CAPAC will also have its own appropriations process in terms of pushing forward its priorities. Research and security are certainly still top priorities in this process. A summary for the meeting is being prepared at this time. 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 . Update on Alien Land Laws in Georgia During the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 4, 2024, Thông Phan, Senior Policy Associate, Advancing Justice - Atlanta, provided updates on the alien land bills that are coming out of Georgia. HB 1093 did not get a vote on Crossover Day. SB 420 passed the Senate. Since the APA Justice meeting was held, SB 132 was quietly revived and passed out of the House Committee on Agriculture and Consumer Affairs. This was possible because Georgia has a 2-year legislative session, and SB 132 had already been passed by the Georgia Senate last year. Thông explains that they are very similar bills. Originally, SB 420 had a 25-mile radius outside of military installations, however, the most recent substitute bill for SB 420 changed its radius to 10 miles. SB 132 changed to mirror the language in HB 1093, which held its restrictions at 10 miles outside of a military installation. Both have restrictions on the purchase of agricultural land and some exemptions for residential property. Both target individuals as well as companies from China, Hong Kong, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela. Something new in this year's bills is that violations of these bills carry penalties of possible felony convictions and monetary penalties of up to $15,000 and/or one or two years in prison.SB 420 passed the Senate on a 41 to 11 vote. It is now assigned to the House Judiciary Committee in Georgia. [which has a committee hearing on March 19, 2024. During the past year, Thông wrote a report, held a webinar, and convened community members and lawmakers to bring awareness to the bills. Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta has an action network letter that was signed by at least 1,400 people. It has been distributed in various forms to reflect changes in the bills as they moved through the legislative process. A coalition of groups in Georgia is working on this issue. Their focus is to continue lobbying, testifying against the bill, and getting community members involved. On March 12, 2024, AP reported on the passing of SB420. State Senator Nabilah Islam Parkes , a Democrat from Duluth, slammed the bill during debate on the Senate floor, comparing it to historical attempts by lawmakers in the U.S. to limit immigration from China and land ownership by Asian Americans. “This bill provides no real national security benefit, but does threaten the safety and security of Asian Americans, immigrants from Asia and other immigrants,” she said. “Questioning people’s loyalty, trustworthiness and dangerousness based on their country of origin is offensive and xenophobic.” Advocate Megan Gordon cited the litigation around Florida’s law to urge members of the Florida House Agriculture and Consumer Affairs committee not to push forward with similar legislation. “It doesn’t really make sense for us to wade into pending litigation in this way,” said Gordon, policy manager with the Georgia chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Thông Phan, with Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta, said the Georgia Senate bill wrongly treats citizens of China and the other targeted countries as their agents.“It targets individuals and families more so than it targets foreign governments,” he said in a phone interview with AP . “How is it effective in achieving national security?” Read the March 12 AP report: https://bit.ly/3VisbO1On March 21, 2024, multiple media including AP , Georgia Recorder , State Affairs , and Georgia Public Broadcasting reported the Georgia House of Representatives voted 97 to 67 in favor of SB420. Democratic Rep. Michelle Au , whose parents came to the U.S. from China, said regardless of intent, the bill would be perceived as racist and xenophobic by the people it could affect most. “This bill does not target intent, it restricts rights based on national origin, which is illegal,” she said. “Legality aside, put that aside for a moment, this bill, whether it’s supposed to be or not, paints a picture that residents from certain parts of this world cannot be trusted. They are essentially suspect and potentially traitors simply by dint of their nationality. Think about the message this sends to the international community. Think about the message this sends to business partners who’ve been proud to welcome and cultivate in the state, bringing vehicle and battery plants, manufacturing, huge technology, and export industries, and thousands of jobs that come with them.” Minority Whip Sam Park , a Lawrenceville Democrat whose grandparents were refugees from the Korean War, criticized the exemption for companies doing agricultural research. He said the bill could cast “a shadow of suspicion” on any Asian-American looking to buy farmland and echoes past examples of anti-Asian racism. “From the Chinese Exclusion Act that banned immigration from Asia and prevented all Americans of Asian descent from becoming citizens, to the forced relocation and internment of more than 120,000 Japanese Americans, to the rise in hate crimes and discrimination against Asian-Americans fueled by racist rhetoric and disinformation amidst the COVID -19 pandemic, it seems we have not come as far as we thought with respect to living up to our highest American principles and values of ensuring freedom, equality, and justice for all,” he said. Park and other Democrats referenced a Florida law (SB 264) similar to Georgia’s bill that was put on hold by a federal judge as a case moves forward into its constitutionality. What is Texas SB 4? Multiple media have reported on the recent legal whiplash on a Texas state law known as SB 4. A whirlwind of court orders briefly allowed, then blocked again, a highly questionable new immigration law in Texas that would allow state and local law enforcement to arrest and deport people who are in the state illegally. According to NPR , Texas SB 4 was originally set to go into effect on March 5. But the U.S. government and the ACLU both filed lawsuits against it, and a district judge issued a preliminary injunction to block the law from enforcement while the case was being heard. Texas appealed the injunction to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeals court turned to the Supreme Court, which ultimately allowed the law to go into effect before the appeals court blocked it. The Biden administration has argued that Texas overstepped its constitutional limits in passing SB 4, and they maintain that immigration policy and law enforcement are exclusive functions of the federal government.Federal attorneys have repeatedly pointed to a 2012 Supreme Court decision known as Arizona vs. United States, a case about a state law in Arizona that sought to create state-level crimes for immigration offenses and empower local law enforcement to check citizenship status and arrest people suspected of being in the country illegally. In a 5-3 decision, the court sided with the federal government and struck down most of Arizona's law.Groups that advocate for civil rights and immigrants' rights have criticized the law over concerns that it could lead to racial profiling. SB 4 would allow law enforcement officers to question someone's immigration status for any reason. "We know that this law is going to increase racial profiling. We know that this law is going to strip people of their constitutional rights. We know that this law is also going to lead to the mass criminalization of our communities," said Alan Lizarraga , a spokesperson for the Border Network for Human Rights. Opponents also worry that migrants with legitimate claims to asylum could have their federal cases asylum complicated by the Texas law if they come to face state criminal charges.Mexico also opposes the law. Its foreign affairs ministry said in a statement that the country will not accept migrants who have been deported under the Texas law. And it expressed concern for Mexican nationals living in Texas, who it said could now be subject to "expressions of hate, discrimination and racial profiling." With the case back at the Fifth Circuit, Mexico said it plans to file a legal brief in opposition to SB 4 that lays out how the law could affect the relationship between the two countries, the statement said.Read the NPR report: https://n.pr/3TqN07f . News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/03/24 Committee of Concerned Scientists Annual Meeting 2024/03/25 Committee of 100: Asian American Career Ceiling Challenges in Broadcast News2024/04/07 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/04/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/04/19 Committee of 100 Annual Conference and Gala2024/05/02 AAGEN 2024 Executive Leadership Workshop2024/05/05 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting Visit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. 2. Citizenship Question in Census Stopped On March 21, 2024, U.S. Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY) and U.S. Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) announced that they stopped House Republicans from adding a citizenship question to the next United States Census. In 2018, then-President Trump pushed to add a question on the 2020 U.S. Census which would have asked respondents about their citizenship status. Meng and Hirono fought against the plan, and after the Supreme Court blocked it from moving forward, the Trump administration abandoned its crusade. But this past January, House Republicans revisited the effort, attaching a measure to a key funding bill that would have required the question to be on the 2030 census.Meng and Hirono led a letter to congressional leaders urging them to remove it, and the legislation was passed and signed into law without the citizenship question being included. Meng and Hirono had argued that a citizenship question would have caused an undercount of immigrant communities out of fear that the information they provide will be used against them. As a result, it would have jeopardized the Census Bureau’s ability to accurately count every person in the U.S.The lawmakers’ letter, which was signed by 48 other Senators and House members, was sent to House Speaker Mike Johnson , House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries , Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell . Read the announcement: https://bit.ly/4co81rZ . Back View PDF March 22, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Headlined by “How Not to Cure Cancer – The U.S. is purging Chinese scientists in a New Red Scare,” investigative reports emerged on FBI and NIH nationwide activities targeting individuals of Asian descent, especially biomedical researchers in the Houston area. April 19, 2019 Table of Contents Overview MD Anderson Cancer Center Purge of Chinese Cancer Researchers Congressional Probe NIH’s China Initiative Links and References Overview In April 2019, the Houston Chronicle and Science collaborated to produce a series of alarming reports on the targeting of biomedical researchers of Asian descent in the Houston area led by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). The MD Anderson Cancer Center is the first publicly known instance where NIH's inquiries have led an institution to invoke proceedings against researchers who allegedly have violated the rules. On Jun 19, 2019, Bloomberg Business published an investigative report titled “ The U.S. is purging Chinese scientists in a new Red Scare .” It identified the NIH and FBI for targeting ethnic Chinese scientists, including U.S. citizens, searching for a cancer cure. It provided the first account of what happened to Dr. Xifeng Wu 吴息凤. MD Anderson Cancer Center On April 19, 2019, Science reported that NIH inquiries about the foreign ties of specific NIH-funded researchers prompted at least 55 institutions to launch investigations. Five researchers at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, part of the University of Texas system, were the first publicly known instances where NIH’s inquiries led an institution to invoke termination proceedings. Three senior researchers were ousted; one was under investigation; and one did not warrant termination. All were Chinese. MD Anderson had been working with the FBI for several years on undisclosed national security investigations, which included searches of faculty email accounts and in one instance, video surveillance. MD Anderson's actions, as well as the larger NIH and FBI efforts, added to concerns in the Chinese American science community that U.S. officials were targeting researchers for special scrutiny based on their ethnicity. On December 11, 2017, FBI received the cancer center's permission to obtain information from as many as 23 employee email accounts. The revelations fueled complaints that MD Anderson was targeting its Chinese and Chinese American scientists for special scrutiny and removal. Some of the center's critics counted 10 senior MD Anderson researchers or administrators of Chinese descent who had retired, resigned, or been placed on administrative leave in 17 months. Some of these researchers reportedly left of their own accord, but their supporters said that a toxic climate and the perception of racial profiling hastened their departure. Mien-Chie Hung, a researcher born in Taiwan left MD Anderson echoed that view of a brain drain as scientists left under a cloud of suspicion. Hung retired from his position as the cancer center's vice president for basic research to take a job as president of China Medical University in Taichung, Taiwan. He co-authored a letter to Science raising concerns about possible racial profiling at institutions across the country, expressing hope that "increased security measures will not be used to tarnish law-abiding scientists." Some researchers worried the campaign to root out foreign influence at MD Anderson would be counterproductive and prompted some researchers to leave the United States. "These are the top talents that foreign countries have been trying to recruit unsuccessfully," says Steven Pei, an engineering professor in Houston and a former chairman of the board of United Chinese Americans. By November 4, 2019, The New York Times reported 71 institutions, including many of the most prestigious medical schools in the United States, were investigating 180 individual cases involving potential theft of intellectual property. The cases began after the NIH, prompted by information provided by the FBI, sent 18,000 letters in 2018 urging administrators who oversee government grants to be vigilant. Purge of Chinese Cancer Researchers On June 13, 2019, Bloomberg Business published an investigative report titled “ The U.S. is purging Chinese scientists in a new Red Scare. ” It provided a first account of what happened to Dr. Xifeng Wu, an award-winning epidemiologist and naturalized American citizen. She quietly stepped down as director of the Center for Public Health and Translational Genomics at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. Wu resigned in January 2019 after facing several months of investigation and was branded as an oncological double agent in an increasingly globalized world of cancer research. Her resignation, and the recent departures of three other top Chinese American scientists from Houston-based MD Anderson, stem from the China Initiative. Behind the investigation that led to Wu’s exit—and other such probes across the country—was the NIH, in coordination with the FBI. According to the Bloomberg Business report, the NIH, the world’s biggest public funder of basic biomedical research, wields immense power over the nation’s health-research community. It allocates about $26 billion a year in federal grants; roughly $6 billion of that goes to cancer research. In June 2019, NIH officials told the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance that the agency had contacted 61 research institutions about suspected diversion of proprietary information by grant recipients and referred 16 cases, mainly involving undisclosed ties to foreign governments, for possible legal action. Ways of working that had long been encouraged by the NIH and many research institutions, particularly MD Anderson, are now quasi-criminalized, with FBI agents reading private emails, stopping Chinese scientists at airports, and visiting people’s homes to ask about their loyalty. Wu had not been charged with stealing anyone’s ideas, but in effect she stood accused of secretly aiding and abetting cancer research in China, an un-American activity in today’s political climate. She had spent 27 of her 56 years at MD Anderson. A month after resigning, she left her husband and two kids in the U.S. and took a job as dean of a school of public health in China. In the early 2000s, MD Anderson forged “sister” relationships with five major cancer centers in China as part of an initiative to promote international collaborations. In 2015, China awarded MD Anderson its top honor for international scientific cooperation, in a ceremony attended by President Xi Jinping. Wu’s work, like a lot of the academic research now in danger of being stifled, is not about developing patentable drugs. The mission is to reduce risk and save lives by discovering the causes of cancer. Prevention is not a product. It is not sellable. Or stealable. “Historians will have to sort out whether Wu’s story and others like it marked a turning point when U.S. research institutions got serious about China’s avarice for American intellectual property, or a dangerous lurch down the path of paranoia and racial profiling. Or both. In any case, recent events in Houston and elsewhere indicate that Chinese people in America, including U.S. citizens, are now targeted for FBI surveillance,” the Bloomberg Business report said. Congressional Probe On February 20, 2020, The Hill reported that Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who chairs the House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, and Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Chairwoman Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) sent letters to NIH and FBI demanding documents about the two agencies' investigations into whether Chinese Americans were working as spies on behalf of China. While the two lawmakers acknowledged that there have been some confirmed cases of espionage, they questioned whether the focus on Chinese Americans amounted to racial profiling. In their letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Reps. Raskin and Chu pointed to sample cases of Sherry Chen, Professor Xiaoxing Xi and Dr. Wei Su and requested specific information of the FBI investigations and prosecutions involving theft or attempted threat of intellectual property, monitoring of Chinese students and scholars, communications with NIH, college and university security efforts, and counterintelligence training materials, covering the period of January 1, 2014 to the present. In their letter to NIH Director Francis Collins, Reps. Raskin and Chu requested specific information about mass mailings by NIH to 18,000 administrators, cases under NIH investigations and Office of Inspector General referrals, disclosure guidelines, and all communications with the FBI, covering the period of June 1, 2016 to the present. NIH’s China Initiative On March 23, 2023, over a year after the conclusion of the China Initiative, Science published an investigative report titled " Pall of Suspicion ," revealing that the National Institutes of Health's "China initiative" has disrupted hundreds of lives and destroyed numerous academic careers. For decades, Chinese-born U.S. faculty members were applauded for working with colleagues in China, and their universities cited the rich payoff from closer ties to the emerging scientific giant. But those institutions did an about-face after they began to receive emails in late 2018 from NIH. The emails asked some 100 institutions to investigate allegations that one or more of their faculty had violated NIH policies designed to ensure federal funds were being spent properly. Most commonly, NIH claimed a researcher was using part of a grant to do work in China through an undisclosed affiliation with a Chinese institution. Four years later, 103 of those scientists—some 42% of the 246 targeted in the letters, most of them tenured faculty members—had lost their jobs. In contrast to the very public criminal prosecutions of academic scientists under the China Initiative launched in 2018 by then-President Donald Trump to thwart Chinese espionage, NIH’s version has been conducted behind closed doors. Michael Lauer, head of NIH’s extramural research, says that secrecy is necessary to protect the privacy of individual scientists, who are not government employees. Universities consider the NIH-prompted investigations to be a personnel matter, and thus off-limits to queries from reporters. And the targeted scientists have been extremely reticent to talk about their ordeal. Only one of the five scientists whose cases are described in this article has previously gone public with their story. And only one has pushed back successfully, winning a large settlement against her university for terminating her. But a running tally kept by the agency shows the staggering human toll of NIH’s campaign. Besides the dismissals and forced retirements, more than one in five of the 246 scientists targeted were banned from applying for new NIH funding for as long as 4 years—a career-ending setback for most academic researchers. And almost two-thirds were removed from existing NIH grants. NIH’s data also make clear who has been most affected. Some 81% of the scientists cited in the NIH letters identify as Asian, and 91% of the collaborations under scrutiny were with colleagues in China. NIH is by far the largest funder of academic biomedical research in the United States, and some medical centers receive hundreds of millions of dollars annually from the agency. So when senior administrators heard Lauer [Michael Lauer, head of NIH’s extramural research] say a targeted scientist “was not welcome in the NIH ecosystem,” they understood immediately what he meant—and that he was expecting action. “If NIH says there’s a conflict, then there’s a conflict, because NIH is always right,” says David Brenner, who was vice chancellor for health sciences at the University of California, San Diego, in November 2018 when the institution received a letter from Lauer asking it to investigate five medical school faculty members, all born in China. “We were told we have a problem and that it was up to us to fix it.” In a panel discussion hosted by the University of Michigan in March 2024, Professor Ann Chih Lin, asserted that NIH made it clear that if they couldn’t resolve concerns regarding a faculty member and a grant, NIH would not only require universities to repay the grant, but also investigate universities’ entire portfolio of NIH grants. Fearing the loss of grant money, universities often approached the implicated professors and encouraged them to resign voluntarily or retire early. This strategy aimed to avoid a public disciplinary hearing or grievance process, which could bring unwanted attention to the case. Professors involved in such investigations typically refrained from discussing their cases to protect both themselves and the universities, often choosing to depart quietly. Jump to: Overview MD Anderson Cancer Center Purge of Chinese Cancer Researchers Congressional Probe NIH’s China Initiative Headlined by “How Not to Cure Cancer – The U.S. is purging Chinese scientists in a New Red Scare,” investigative reports emerged on FBI and NIH nationwide activities targeting individuals of Asian descent, especially biomedical researchers in the Houston area. Previous Next 3. Media Reports on Purge by NIH and FBI

Newsletter - #291 VOTE! Scholars Speak Up; Chinese Scientists; Stakes for Science; Project 2025; More #291 VOTE! Scholars Speak Up; Chinese Scientists; Stakes for Science; Project 2025; More In This Issue #291 · Scholars Nationwide Endorsed Stanford Letter Opposing Reinstatement of "China Initiative" · China-Born Scientists Face Uncertainty as US Election Looms · Science: The Stakes for Science: What the Next President Could Mean for Research · "Project 2025: An Existential Threat to Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders" · News and Activities for the Communities November 5, 2024, is Election Day. You will make a difference in the election. Vote if you have not done so already! Scholars Nationwide Endorsed Stanford Letter Opposing Reinstatement of "China Initiative" According to the Asian American Scholar Forum, nearly 2,000 faculty members and senior staff from U.S. colleges, universities, and affiliated research laboratories in 46 states and the District of Columbia have joined a growing list of endorsers on an October 8, 2024, letter originally initiated by 166 Stanford University faculty. The letter, led by Professors Steven A. Kivelson and Peter F. Michelson, urges Senate and House leaders— Charles E. Schumer , Mitch McConnell , Mike Johnson , and Hakeem S. Jeffries —not to reinstate the Department of Justice’s "China Initiative." This initiative, they argue, risks undermining U.S. scientific leadership and deterring international STEM talent. The letter highlights that the "national security and economic advantages of U.S. leadership in science and engineering" are strengthened by welcoming international talent. Citing a report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), it warns that other nations, including competitors, are increasingly benefiting from talented individuals the U.S. fails to attract or retain. "A failure to fully capitalize on our advantage in educating and attracting foreign-born science and engineering talent would be a policy ‘own goal’ in an era of increased geopolitical competition for leadership in advanced technologies,” the letter states. America’s strength, it asserts, lies in its openness to diverse global talents.Read the October 28 update letter : https://bit.ly/4ec4Sem . China-Born Scientists Face Uncertainty as US Election Looms According to the South China Morning Post on October 31, 2024, Chinese American scientists are concerned over the implications of the 2024 U.S. presidential election and the possible reinstatement of the China Initiative or its equivalent, which targeted Chinese-born researchers in the name of national security. Researchers like economist Yan Chen and physicist Xiaoxing Xi offer differing views on the candidates, with Chen hoping for a Trump loss due to fears of renewed hostility toward Chinese Americans in academia. Xi, however, is skeptical that a Harris administration would reverse the current bipartisan stance that views China as a primary geopolitical threat. The now-defunct China Initiative, launched in 2018 by the Department of Justice under Trump, aimed to counter China’s economic espionage but led to disproportionate scrutiny of Chinese American and immigrant academics. Instead of uncovering spies, it often targeted minor administrative infractions, such as failures to disclose affiliations with Chinese institutions. Examples of this overreach include Dr. Franklin Tao , a former University of Kansas professor, whose career was damaged and financial stability ruined by costly legal battles. Dr. Anming Hu , a professor at the University of Tennessee, faced equally severe consequences after an FBI investigation misinterpreted his work due to a lack of understanding of academic collaborations. Charges against Hu were ultimately dropped, and he was reinstated to the university, but his career and personal life suffered lasting impacts, including stress-related health issues for his family. Studies by legal researcher Andrew Chongseh Kim reveal an increase in espionage-related prosecutions against Chinese Americans since 2009, highlighting a shift in the U.S. perception of China as a strategic threat. Kim notes that Chinese Americans comprised only 16% of espionage defendants from 1996 to 2008; after 2009, this number tripled, reflecting the broader national security emphasis. Investigations have also impacted Chinese American cancer researchers at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, where many were dismissed or forced to leave their roles, even without concrete evidence of wrongdoing. Ongoing investigations by agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have intensified the “chilling effect” on Chinese American academics, discouraging them from federal grant applications and collaborative research. The Asian American Scholar Forum recently held a public meeting with NIH leaders to address these concerns, where scholars expressed frustration over the lack of accountability and the significant harm done to their careers and reputations. Denis Simon , a Duke University professor, warns of the potential long-term damage to U.S. science and technology fields due to the climate of fear, which may deter young talent from China from studying in the United States. He cautions that continuing to target Chinese-born scientists will hamper the country's scientific advancement. Despite the formal end of the "China Initiative," Simon argues that ongoing tensions have escalated, and educational institutions fear repercussions if perceived as too "China-friendly." This atmosphere, fueled by bipartisan support for tougher policies on China, has strained not only individual scientists but also broader academic collaboration, risking an innovation gap as the U.S. disengages from some of the world’s leading research talent and perspectives. Read the South China Morning Post report: https://bit.ly/4f2nT4n Science : The Stakes for Science: What the Next President Could Mean for Research The cover of the October 18 issue of Science highlighted "The Stakes for Science: What the Next President Could Mean for Research?" According to the editorial, the 2024 election has drawn attention to key issues shaping the U.S. scientific landscape, highlighting concerns about global competitiveness, talent retention, and political influences on science policy. In 2020, with the COVID-19 pandemic at its peak, science was at the forefront of political debate. Fast forward to 2024, science has largely been relegated to the background as economic concerns dominate the national conversation. This shift highlights the persistent difficulty in maintaining consistent political support for science and technology in the U.S.As China’s rapid rise in scientific output surpasses that of the U.S., concerns about America’s global scientific standing have come to the forefront. China’s lead in research publications and the growing quality of its scientific output signal a shift that alarms many in the U.S. scientific and political communities, where the long-standing scientific and technological dominance has been foundational to U.S. geopolitical power since World War II.In response, both Republicans and Democrats have pursued increasingly restrictive policies regarding collaboration with Chinese researchers, citing national security concerns. The editorial highlights how these restrictions, originally introduced under Trump’s administration, have persisted under Biden, albeit with a different rhetorical approach. "Today’s politicians are more focused on overprotecting the tiny amount of know-how they fear could slip out of the US than on the overall success of the country’s scientific enterprise," the editorial said. While Trump’s administration openly employed anti-Asian rhetoric and policies, labeling Chinese scholars as potential security threats, the Biden administration has also maintained some of these restrictive measures, albeit under the guise of protecting intellectual property. The result has been a "chilling effect" on U.S.-China research partnerships, leading many Chinese scientists to return to China, depriving U.S. institutions of talent in fields critical to American innovation. These policies have raised concerns within the U.S. scientific community that they might undermine America’s long-term competitiveness by stifling collaboration and alienating researchers."This is bleeding the US of talent and squandering millions of federal dollars that have been invested in the development of Chinese scientists who might otherwise have stayed," the editorial said.This loss of talent is not a minor issue; it undermines decades of U.S. investment in building a diverse and world-leading scientific workforce. For years, the U.S. has benefited from the immigration of highly skilled scientists, many from China, who have played a key role in driving innovation in industries ranging from biotechnology to artificial intelligence. The recent political climate, however, has reversed this trend. Policies driven by national security concerns are seen by many as overly intrusive and counterproductive, focusing more on restricting access to knowledge rather than fostering innovation.Amid these growing tensions, there is also increasing scrutiny of the NIH, the leading U.S. agency for medical research. "Efforts by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to expose and punish Chinese scientists have attracted bipartisan support," the editorial said. On the eve of Science reporting allegations of research misconduct by NIH Alzheimer's leader Eliezer Masliah , the NIH issued a generic statement acknowledging the misconduct. However, Director Monica Bertagnolli has said nothing on the record to reassure the public or Congress that the agency recognizes how badly these findings reflect on the NIH or that it intends to keep this from happening again. The pattern is similar in Dr. Bertagnolli 's statement of support for Asian American, Asian immigrant and Asian researchers after the suicide of Dr. Jane Wu of the School of Medicine at Northwestern University.Responses by both Republicans and Democrats have raised broader questions about the governance and future direction of federal science agencies, especially as public trust in institutions like the NIH has been eroded by high-profile scandals.As the election nears, the stakes for American science have never been higher. If U.S. policymakers continue to prioritize short-term political gains over long-term investments in science and research, the country risks falling further behind China and other global competitors. The debate over immigration, research collaboration, and the future of scientific funding reflects deeper philosophical divisions over who should have access to American scientific resources and how federal agencies should respond to public scrutiny and controversy. Whether the U.S. can regain its footing as a global leader in research will depend not only on who wins the presidency but also on the political will to address the systemic challenges that have long been ignored. Questions about how to balance national security with the need for international collaboration, how to rebuild public trust in science institutions, and how to sustain the U.S.’s leadership in innovation will remain central to this evolving debate. The outcome of the election could either pave the way for renewed investment in science or further entrench the barriers that are slowly eroding the nation’s scientific capacity. Science noted in the feature article that the presidential candidates have said almost nothing about science. Despite this silence, the next president’s impact on the U.S. research community will be significant, influencing climate change policy, public health, U.S.-China scientific competition, and AI regulation. Both Harris and Trump will face decisions about attracting foreign scientific talent, supporting domestic researchers, and ensuring government scientists can work without political interference. Science proceeded to compare the presidential candidates on six major issues: · Research budgets · Burdensome rules · Green cards for scientists · The president’s scientist · Staying tough on China · Training the next generation Read these Science articles: 2024/10/16 Science Editorial: Same but different 2024/10/16 Science : The stakes for science: Where Kamala Harris and Donald Trump stand on the issues that matter most to scientists "Project 2025: An Existential Threat to Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders" In August 2024, Stop AAPI Hate published a commentary providing a rundown of Project 2025, explaining why it is so dangerous for Asian American and Pacific Islander (AA/PI) communities from the deportation of immigrants to the full-scale attack on civil rights.Project 2025 is an ultra-conservative blueprint by the Heritage Foundation with the aim to reshape the governance of the United States in a Republican administration, including extensive plans to change immigration, civil rights, education, and social welfare policies. Stop AAPI Hate's analysis highlights the project's potentially harmful impacts on Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities and other marginalized groups.Stop AAPI Hate's key concerns are: Project 2025 targets AA/PI and other immigrants for arrest, incarceration, and deportation. · The plan would give Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents broad access to detain and deport immigrants without a warrant, wherever and whenever they choose. · It would add a citizenship question to the U.S. Census, discouraging citizens and non-citizens alike from responding — leading to decreased federal funding and political representation for immigrant-rich communities (Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, pg. 680). · The project would eliminate family-based immigration and other immigration categories that have allowed generations of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders to immigrate to the United States (Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, pg. 145). Project 2025 will fuel the racial profiling of scientists, researchers, and international students, threatening our civil rights and technological leadership. · It would revive the “China Initiative,” leading to a second wave of racist witch hunts targeting Chinese scientists and researchers (Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, pg. 556). · It would lead to the discontinuation of visas for Chinese students and researchers, hampering progress in critical fields (Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, pg. 790). Project 2025 will make it next to impossible for working families to thrive. · The plan would dramatically expand tariffs to “levels that will block out ‘Made in China’ products”, worsening US-China trade relations and driving across-the-board inflation and job losses (Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, pg. 789). · It would drastically cut food assistance and other critical social benefits, plunging millions of working families below the poverty line. · It would impose sweeping reforms to K-12 and higher education, making it harder for low and middle income students to access education opportunities. · The project would put new restrictions on reproductive rights and let politicians make life-altering decisions about our bodies. · It would reduce worker protections against race- or gender-based discrimination. Read the Stop AAPI commentary on Project 2025: https://bit.ly/4fnBxPh News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2024/11/06 Asian American Women in Media and Music2024/11/07 Critical Issues in the US-China Science and Technology Relationship2024/11/10 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/11/12 Threats to International Engagement and Academic Freedom2024/11/14 An Advice and Networking Event (Financial Services, Investing and Consulting)2024/11/15 Yangtze-Mississippi Regional Dialogue2024/11/15-17 AAASE Inaugural Summit2024/11/17 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/11/18 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/11/24 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/12/01 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. NOTE: Because the regular scheduled day falls on the eve of Election Day, we have moved the next APA Justice monthly meeting to Monday, November 18, 2024. 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 . 2. Critical Issues in the US-China Science and Technology Relationship WHAT: Critical Issues in the US-Science and Technology Relationship WHEN: November 7, 2024, 4:00 pm - 5:30 pm PT/7:00 pm - 8:30 pm ET WHERE: Hybrid event · In-Person : George P. Shultz Building, Annenberg Conference Room, Stanford University · Streaming : https://stanford.io/4e9VpV7 HOST: Hoover Institution, Stanford University Moderator: Frances Hisgen , Senior Research Program Manager, Hoover Institution Speakers: · Zhenan Bao , K.K. Lee Professor of Chemical Engineering, Stanford University · Yasheng Huang, Epoch Foundation Professor of Global Economics and Management, MIT · Peter F. Michelson , Luke Blossom Professor in the School of Humanities & Sciences and Professor of Physics, Stanford University · Glenn Tiffert , Distinguished Research Fellow, Hoover Institution DESCRIPTION: Both the United States and the People’s Republic of China see sustaining leadership in science and technology (S+T) as foundational to national and economic security. Policymakers on both sides of the Pacific have taken action to promote indigenous innovation, and to protect S+T ecosystems from misappropriation of research and malign technology transfer. In the US, some of these steps, including the China Initiative, have led to pain, mistrust, and a climate of fear, particularly for students and scholars of and from China. Newer efforts, including research security programs and policies, seek to learn from these mistakes. A distinguished panel of scientists and China scholars will discuss these dynamics and their implications. What are the issues facing US-China science and technology collaboration? What are the current challenges confronting Chinese American scientists? How should we foster scientific ecosystems that are inclusive, resilient to security challenges, and aligned with democratic values? REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/3YwyOvU 3. 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 November 4, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #238 Erika's Message; Day of Remembrance; OSTP/House Hearing; AASF Updates; US-China STA; + #238 Erika's Message; Day of Remembrance; OSTP/House Hearing; AASF Updates; US-China STA; + In This Issue #238 · Erika Moritsugu - 2023 Review and 2024 Outlook · Day of Remembrance for Japanese American Incarceration · OSTP Guidance and House Science Committee Hearing · Updates from the Asian American Scholars Forum · State of Renewal of US-China Science and Technology Agreement · News and Activities for the Communities Erika Moritsugu - 2023 Review and 2024 Outlook Erika Moritsugu, Deputy Assistant to the President and Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Senior Liaison, The White House, reviewed the Year of the Rabbit (or Cat in Vietnamese zodiac) in 2023 and remarked on the Year of Dragon in 2024 during the APA Justice monthly meeting on February 5, 2024. She was joined by her colleagues Ting Wu and Barbara Holston .Erika highlighted the significance of her role at the White House and extended Lunar New Year greetings. Erika reviewed the accomplishments of the White House Initiative on AA and NHPI, including initiatives such as regional economic summits, the Mental Health Summit, and the publication of the National Strategy to advance equity for AA and NHPI communities, all with strong commitment of the Biden administration. Erika described President Joe Biden 's proclamation recognizing AANAPISI programs and the renewal of the President’s Advisory Commission on AA and NHPI, including the hiring of new permanent staff.While Erika and her team are proud of what has been accomplished for our communities, by our communities, and with our communities so far, they also know that there is still more to do in ensuring equity, justice, opportunity, and safety for AA and NHPI in the new year.Looking ahead to 2024, Erika outlines goals to advance the President's agenda, including increasing federal contracting dollars for disadvantaged small businesses and combating hate-fueled violence.On research security, Erika reaffirms that the Biden-Harris Administration's commitment to the integral role of AA and NHPI and people of all national origins in this country and supporting collaboration with international partners when it is in our interest. The White House is aware of the perceptions, biases, stereotypes and efforts to implement research security policies that may be influenced. The Federal government collaborates with researchers and institutions to develop guidance ensuring: · Protection of America's security and openness while recognizing the importance of global collaboration in basic research. · Clarity in the guidance provided to researchers. · Prevention of the guidance from fueling xenophobia or prejudice. On the People’s Republic of China (PRC), although the United States and the PRC are in competition, the Administration remains committed to maintaining open lines of communication and responsibly managing that competition. The Administration is keenly aware that the United States and the PRC are economically interdependent and share interest in addressing transnational costs and reducing the risk of conflict. It also expects the PRC to be a major player on the world stage for the foreseeable future.That means that even if we compete, we want to find ways to live alongside one another.Last year the Administration launched a period of intensive diplomacy. It was an all-hands-on-deck effort across the cabinet, scanning the full range of the relationship with the PRC. It was direct about our differences. The meetings were also used to find space to coordinate on issues where our interests overlap, culminating in the summit between President Biden and President Xi in Woodside, California, where progress was made on three major issues. 1. President Biden and President Xi started counter narcotics cooperation, 2. Announcement of military-to-military communication that has been frozen for more than a year, 3. Announcement of a new dialogue aimed at managing the risk of artificial intelligence. The Administration acknowledges the concerns of the AA and NHPI communities regarding tensions in the US-PRC relationship. It pledges to redouble efforts to protect these communities from any impacts. President Biden emphasizes that hate must have no safe haven in America and commits to combatting hate-fueled violence. The Administration is dedicated to ensuring safety, opportunity, and justice for all members of the communities. Recent events underscore the importance of government responsiveness to community needs. Erika and her team recognize the vital role of community engagement and partnership in their work. She expresses gratitude to community leaders for their activism and collaboration.Erika concluded her remarks with a big Mahalo Nui Loa for what we do for our communities and for sharing the space at the APA Justice meeting.Read the partial summary of the February 2024 APA Justice monthly meeting at: https://bit.ly/49jyZPH . Watch Erika's talk and the February monthly meeting: https://bit.ly/49okkmc (57:00) Day of Remembrance for Japanese American Incarceration On February 19, 1942, following the attack by Imperial Japan on Pearl Harbor and the United States’ entry to WWII, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 , which led to the forced removal and incarceration of over 120,000 individuals of Japanese ancestry during World War II. This day is recognized annually in the Japanese American community as the Day of Remembrance, and was recognized in 2023 by President Joe Biden who called the order “one of the most shameful periods in our Nation’s history.”According to AP News , from the extreme heat of the Gila River center in Arizona, to the biting winters of Heart Mountain in Wyoming, Japanese Americans were forced into hastily built barracks, with no insulation or privacy, and surrounded by barbed wire. They shared bathrooms and mess halls, and families of up to eight were squeezed into 20-by-25 foot rooms. Armed U.S. soldiers in guard towers ensured nobody tried to flee.Approximately two-thirds of the detainees were American citizens.When the 75 holding facilities on U.S. soil closed in 1946, there was no clear consensus of who or how many had been detained nationwide. Duncan Ryūken Williams , the director of the Shinso Ito Center for Japanese Religions and Culture at the University of Southern California, and a team of researchers took on the mammoth task of identifying all the detainees and honoring them with a three-part monument called “Irei: National Monument for the WWII Japanese American Incarceration.” “We wanted to repair that moment in American history by thinking of the fact that this is a group of people, Japanese Americans, that was targeted by the government. As long as you had one drop of Japanese blood in you, the government told you you didn’t belong,” Williams said. The first part of the Irei monument is the Ireichō, the sacred book listing 125,284 verified names of Japanese American detainees. The team recorded every name in order of age, from the oldest person who entered the camps to the last baby born there. “We felt like we needed to bring dignity and personhood and individuality back to all these people,” Williams said. “The best way we thought we could do that was to give them their names back.”Read the AP News report: https://bit.ly/49loOda . Read the Ireichō Exhibition at the Japanese American National Museum: https://bit.ly/3UKzJsH . The exhibition closes on December 1, 2024. Read President Biden's statement: https://bit.ly/3I5QPtl . Read the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus statement: https://bit.ly/3SCdSRe OSTP Guidance and House Science Committee Hearing On February 14, 2024, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) announced the release of two memoranda aimed at supporting a secure and fair research ecosystem in the United States: 1. On Policy Regarding Use of Common Disclosure Forms , OSTP outlines guidelines on the use of common disclosure forms for federal agencies to use when evaluating proposals. These will help the government identify conflicts of commitment and potential duplication with the work of foreign governments. 2. On Guidelines for Federal Research Agencies Regarding Foreign Talent Recruitment Programs , The OSTP guidance provides a definition of foreign talent recruitment programs, guidelines for federal employees regarding foreign talent recruitment programs, and guidelines for individuals involved in malign foreign talent recruitment programs in federal projects. On February 15, 2024, The House Committee on Science, Space and Technology held a hearing titled " Examining Federal Science Agency Actions to Secure the U.S. Science and Technology Enterprise ." Four witnesses testified at the hearing: · The Honorable Arati Prabhakar , Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy · Dr. Rebecca Keiser , Chief of Research Security Strategy and Policy, National Science Foundation · The Honorable Geri Richmond , Under Secretary for Science and Innovation, Department of Energy · Dr. Michael Lauer , Deputy Director for Extramural Research, National Institutes of Health A hearing charter is posted here: https://bit.ly/3OOkw5W . A video of the hearing is available here: https://bit.ly/3T8ltsz (2:39:21). Updates from the Asian American Scholars Forum Gisela Perez Kusakawa, Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), highlighted the following points during the APA Justice monthly meeting on February 5, 2024: · Expressing gratitude for recent efforts by Rep. Grace Meng and others opposing the reinstatement of the China initiative, recognizing the Biden administration's actions in ending it, and the release of NSPM 33 to harmonize disclosures. She emphasized AASF's ongoing opposition efforts with a coalition of 50 organizations and the importance of community support in this endeavor. · AASF will hold its annual symposium on July 27 focusing on emerging technologies. It will honor Asian American pioneers and involve high school students in celebrating Asian American history and innovation. The symposium will feature top scientists in AI, life sciences, and other emerging technologies. Gisela encourages community participation and emphasizes the importance of Asian American representation in shaping policies and regulations for emerging technologies. AASF celebrates Asian American scholar excellence and strives to shift away from the environment of scapegoating. · Gisela discussed AASF's accomplishments in the past year, including its growth and mobilizations to improve the climate on university and college campuses, support of individual cases, as well as advocacy efforts with the Biden administration, Congress, federal agencies, community partners. AASF operates behind the scenes with partners listening to stories of people on the ground and seeing how AASF can make sure that their stories are not just collateral damage, but that on a high level AASF can change many of these policies that are directly impacting them. · AASF launched a pioneer project and collaboration with the National Asian Pacific American Smithsonian Museum, which was shared by the National Science Foundation Director and has over 18,000 viewers. AASF is committed to preserving the history of Asian American scholars and addressing urgent issues, such as incidents of profiling at the border and impacts of a restrictive Florida law SB 864 that restricts Florida's public colleges and universities from hiring researchers and graduate students from several countries of concern that include China and Iran. AASF has prepared an explainer and is working on an impact assessment specifically for professors. Gisela emphasized the importance of keeping Congressional members aware and community support and involvement in their efforts. In conclusion, Gisela expressed appreciation for support and hopes for continued growth and advocacy for the Asian American scholar community in the upcoming year.Contact Gisela at gpkusakawa@aasforum.org . Read the partial summary of the February 2024 APA Justice monthly meeting at: https://bit.ly/49jyZPH . Watch Gisela's talk and the February monthly meeting: https://bit.ly/49okkmc (57:00) State of Renewal of US-China Science and Technology Agreement According to Nature on February 8, China and the United States will once again probably delay the renewal of a decades-old Science and Technology Agreement (STA). The two nations have been negotiating for the past six months but need more time to settle new terms and conditions requested by both sides, sources tell Nature .The STA, which is usually renewed every five years, was due to expire on August 27 last year. The US and China approved a six-month extension of the current agreement until February 27, to give officials time to renegotiate. Now, it looks like they will delay it again, and approve a second extension, says Denis Simon , a specialist on US–China innovation and trade relations at the Institute for China–America Studies in Washington DC.According to Simon, over the past six months, US and Chinese negotiators have met several times to hash out a new pact — a positive sign. The US wants assurances of the personal safety of its scientists who travel to China for collaborative projects and greater clarity over the access, ownership and sharing of data, According to Marina Zhang at the University of Technology Sydney in Australia, China also has some reservations about renewing the pact as it currently stands. It is concerned that the agreement might encourage Chinese scientists to leave and work in the United States. Deborah Seligsohn , a specialist in US–China relations at Villanova University in Pennsylvania, observes that the US might also want to restrict the fields of research while the previous agreement had no restrictions on the types of research that were available for partnership. Researchers slam this idea. Professor Steven Kivelson at Stanford University in California, says that ending collaboration with China in quantum materials would be like “cutting off our own arms.” Kivelson and his colleague, Stanford Professor Peter Michelson , wrote to US President Joe Biden last year urging the government to renew the pact. More than 1,000 academics signed the letter: https://bit.ly/44xTNPX .Read the Nature report: https://go.nature.com/3T3Cx2B . Read the Congressional Research Service backgrounder: https://bit.ly/4bFqtMh When asked about the state of the renewal of the US-China STA during the House Committee hearing on February 15, 2024, OSTP Director Arati Prabhakar responded that the matter is in the hands of the State Department. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/02/22 Census Bureau: Exploring the Diversity and Growth of the Asian American Population2024/02/27-28 President's Advisory Commission on AA and NHPIs Meeting and Solicitation for Oral and Written Comments2024/02/28 WHI: Community Engagement Event2024/02/29 CAMDC Deadline for Essay Contest2024/03/03 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/03/04 APA Justice Monthly MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. 2. UCA: 2024 Chinese American Convention United Chinese Americans (UCA) announced that it will hold the 2024 Chinese American Convention in Washington DC on June 27-30, 2024. Visit https://bit.ly/3T41PxC if you wish to propose a topic for the convention. Back View PDF February 22, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #24 New Cold War On Research; Culture Of Silence; Data And Research Needs; 2020 Census #24 New Cold War On Research; Culture Of Silence; Data And Research Needs; 2020 Census Back View PDF October 23, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #310 Getting China Right at Home; Trump Action Tracker; Birthright Citizenship; DEI Attacks #310 Getting China Right at Home; Trump Action Tracker; Birthright Citizenship; DEI Attacks In This Issue #310 · Launch of ACF: Getting China Right at Home · Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions · Lawsuits Against Executive Orders on Birthright Citizenship and DEI · Understanding Attacks on DEI in Higher Ed · News and Activities for the Communities Launch of ACF: Getting China Right at Home On February 3, 2025, the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) of Johns Hopkins University offcially launched the Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs (ACF). ACF aims to add rigor and reason to the public and policy conversation about China and the variety of domestic and international issues that intersect China’s global role, bringing together experts and practitioners to foster informed public dialogue, promote evidence-based research, and support the next generation of scholars and practitioners. Jim Steinberg , Dean of Johns Hopkins University SAIS, and Jessica Chen Weiss , Inaugural Faculty Director of ACF and David M. Lampton Professor of China Studies, Johns Hopkins University SAIS, led off the all-day event with welcoming remarks. Senator Andy Kim discussed what is at stake in U.S. policy on China in a Fireside Chat .According to the inaugural ACF report titled Getting China Right at Home: Addressing the Domestic Challenges of Intensifying Competition , there is bipartisan agreement that advancing American interests requires getting policy right at home on issues from technology, data, trade, investment, energy, law, and labor, to the concerns of local constituencies, including governors, mayors, and Chinese Americans. Getting China Right at Home offers a spectrum of fresh perspectives on ways to center the vitality of American democracy, economy, and society in the United States’ strategy toward China.ACF is in Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Center, 555 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, D.C. 20001. Contact saisacf@jh.edu for more information.In an interview with the South China Morning Post on February 3, Weiss argues that the U.S.-China rivalry need not be a zero-sum game. She emphasizes the importance of recognizing areas where both nations can cooperate for mutual benefit, suggesting that a collaborative approach could lead to more positive outcomes than a purely competitive stance. Weiss advocates for policies that balance competition with engagement, aiming to manage differences while working together on global challenges. Read the South China Morning Post interview: https://bit.ly/3Qa8h3K Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions On January 29, 2025, Just Security launched a Tracker monitoring legal challenges to Trump Administration actions. The Tracker is expected to expand with periodic updates. It features a search function and allows sorting by Topic, Executive Action, Case Name, and Date Filed. To help maintain its accuracy and completeness, missing cases and updates should be reported to lte@justsecurity.org . As of February 5, 2025, the Tracker at https://bit.ly/3QpPIsR has 35 entries: Immigration and Citizenship (12) · Birthright Citizenship Executive Order (7) · Punishment of sanctuary cities and states (1) · "Expedited Removal" Executive Order (2) · Discontinuation of CBP One app Executive Order (1) · Access of Lawyers to Immigrants in Detention Executive Order (1) Structure of Government/Personnel (12) · Reinstatement of Schedule F for Policy/Career Employees Executive Order (3) · Establishment of "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) Executive Order (4) · Solicitation of information from career employees (1) · Disclosure of personal and financial records to DOGE (2) · "Fork Directive" deferred resignation offer to federal employees OPM Directive (1) · Removal of agency employees (1) Government Grants, Loans and Assistance (2) · “Temporary Pause” of grants, loans, and assistance programs (2) Civil Liberties and Rights (5) · Housing of transgender inmates Executive Order (2) · Ban on transgender individuals serving in the military Executive Order (1) · Ban on gender affirming care for individuals under the age of 19 ender Ideology Executive Order ; Denial of Care Executive Order (1) · Immigration enforcement against places of worship Policy Memo (1) Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (1) · Ban on DEIA Initiatives in the executive branch and by contractors Executive Order ; Contracting Executive Order (1) Removal of Information from Government Websites (1) · Removal of information from HHS websites under Executive Order on "Gender Ideology Extremism" Executive Order ; Policy Memo (1) Actions Against FBI/DOJ Employees (2) · Department of Justice review of FBI personnel involved in January 6 investigations Executive Order on Weaponization (2) Lawsuits Against Executive Orders on Birthright Citizenship and DEI According to the National Park Service , "Chinese Americans filed more than 10,000 lawsuits to fight the discriminatory laws enacted in the United States in the late 1800s and early 1900s.” Twenty of these cases were heard by the US Supreme Court. These cases set legal precedents for many landmark human rights lawsuits. In addition, Part 2 of the 2003 PBS Documentary on " BECOMING AMERICAN: The Chinese Experience " describes how the Chinese boldly filed over 10,000 lawsuits challenging laws and practices designed to harass and oppress them. When Wong Kim Ark , a 22-year-old cook born in San Francisco, sued to be considered a citizen, it was a decisive victory against discriminatory legislation. We thank those who came before us for their courage and perseverance in securing the freedoms we enjoy today. It is our responsibility to honor their legacy by continuing the fight for future generations.On January 30, 2025, OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates filed a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump ’s executive order on birthright citizenship. OCA - Asian Pacific American Advocates v. Rubio (1:25-cv-00287) argues that the order is unconstitutional and would cause irreparable harm to immigrant families, including OCA members expecting children who would be denied citizenship. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, it is one of eight known lawsuits against the order (one of which was consolidated in the same U.S. District Court). The legal team is led by Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP and Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC. Read the complaint: https://bit.ly/3WMKlHA .According to New York Times on February 5, 2025, Judge Deborah L. Boardman issued a preliminary injunction blocking President Trump’s attempt to unilaterally eliminate automatic U.S. citizenship for children born to undocumented or temporary immigrants on U.S. soil. The injunction applies nationally and is more permanent than the 14-day temporary restraining order issued on January 23 by a federal judge in Seattle. In most cases, a preliminary injunction remains in force until a case is resolved or a higher court overturns it. “The executive order conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment, contradicts 125-year-old binding Supreme Court precedent and runs counter to our nation’s 250-year history of citizenship by birth,” Judge Boardman ruled. “The United States Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected the president’s interpretation of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. In fact, no court in the country has ever endorsed the president’s interpretation. This court will not be the first.” The Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University Law Center is representing the plaintiffs in CASA Inc. et al v. Trump et al (8:25-cv-00201) On January 20, 2025, the Chairs of the Congressional Tri-Caucus—Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Chair Rep. Grace Meng (NY-06), Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Chair Rep. Yvette Clarke (NY-09), and Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) Chair Rep. Adriano Espaillat (NY-13) issued a joint statement condemning President Trump’s executive order to end birthright citizenship, calling it a violation of the 14th Amendment and his constitutional duty. They emphasized that birthright citizenship, upheld in the 1898 Wong Kim Ark case, is a fundamental right and vowed to oppose any efforts that undermine equality, justice, and civil rights.On February 4, 2025, a coalition of higher education and civic leaders filed a lawsuit to stop President Trump’s anti-DEI executive orders. National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump (1:25-cv-00333) challenging two Trump executive orders that seek to eliminate diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) initiatives. The first order mandates the removal of DEIA programs and professionals from federal agencies and halts “equity-related” grants and contracts. The second order threatens federal funding, civil investigations, and enforcement actions against DEIA programs, both in the public and private sectors. National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, American Association of University Professors, Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, and Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Maryland, argue that these orders are unconstitutional, violate free speech protections, and unlawfully usurp congressional control over federal funding. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the state of Maryland. The legal team is led by Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC and Democracy Forward Foundation. Read the complaint: https://bit.ly/42JONuC . Understanding Attacks on DEI in Higher Ed On January 31, 2025, the Chronicle of Higher Education announced a diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) Legislation Tracker on bills that would prohibit colleges from requiring classes to graduate that promote concepts such as systemic racism, reparations, and racial or gender diversity, or from offering student-orientation programs with such content. The Tracker allows readers to quickly understand what practices are at risk of being banned, where legislation is making progress, and what laws have been enacted. If the summations of the legislation are not enough, links to browse through the bills themselves are provided. The Chronicle invites questions and comments to editor@chronicle.com . Read the DEI Legislation Tracker: https://bit.ly/4goHoDX The Chronicle of Higher Education has also been documenting the reduction of DEI initiatives across numerous U.S. colleges and universities. As of January 31, 2025, their tracking indicates that 232 campuses in 34 states have altered or eliminated DEI-related offices, positions, training programs, diversity statements, and other activities. These changes are largely in response to anti-DEI legislation and mounting political pressure. The pace of these modifications has increased, especially with the federal administration's intent to remove DEI efforts across various sectors, including higher education. The Chronicle's resource provides detailed information on these developments, helping readers understand the evolving landscape of DEI in academia. Read the most recent updates: https://bit.ly/3CPOT9f News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/02/10 Federal Employees: What are my whistleblower rights?2025/02/12 Federal Employees: How might my benefits be affected?2025/02/13 China Initiative: Impacts and Implications2025/02/13-15 2025 AAAS Annual Meeting2025/02/16 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/02/18 Protecting Our Organizations: 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Compliance Virtual Training2025/02/23 World Premier of "Quixotic Professor Qiu" with Xiaoxing Xi2025/03/02 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/03/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. February is Black History Month Black History Month is an annual observance in February that honors the history, achievements, and contributions of African Americans. It was established by historian C arter G. Woodson in 1926 as Negro History Week and later expanded to a month-long celebration in 1976. The month serves as a time to recognize the struggles and triumphs of Black Americans throughout U.S. history, from the fight against slavery and segregation to advancements in civil rights, culture, politics, science, and more. Various events, educational programs, and community activities are held nationwide to celebrate and reflect on African American heritage. 3. Book: The Rise of Chinese American Leaders in U.S. Higher Education The softcover edition of The Rise of Chinese American Leaders in U.S. Higher Education: Stories and Roadmaps, has been released with a discount code valid until February 12, 2025. The book explores the history, challenges, and achievements of Chinese Americans in academia, featuring 36 narratives from chancellors, presidents, deans, and other leaders. It highlights their contributions to higher education, diversity, and social justice while addressing barriers like the "bamboo ceiling." For more information, visit: https://bit.ly/411FQeF # # # 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 February 7, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #64 Letter To Commerce Secretary; Profiling Of Federal Employees; More Rallies #64 Letter To Commerce Secretary; Profiling Of Federal Employees; More Rallies Back View PDF June 7, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Kaikai Zhao 赵凯凯 Docket ID: 1:20-cr-00187 District Court, S.D. Indiana Date filed: Aug 4, 2020 Date ended: July 26, 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 Kaikai Zhao. A fifth scientist was arrested for similar charges in August 2020. Kaikai Zhao applied for a United States Non-Immigrant Visa in June 2018 and was issued an F1 Visa for a PhD program studying machine learning and artificial Intelligence at Indiana University (IU) in Bloomington, Indiana. On July 23, 2020, DOJ charged Kaikai Zhao and charged with one count of visa fraud and one count of making false statement. On July 23, 2021, Acting U.S. Attorney John E. Childress and Assistant United States Attorney Matthew J. Rinka motioned to dismiss the case against Kaikai Zhao “with prejudice, in the interests of justice.” On July 26, 2021, Judge James R. Sweeny, II, granted the dismissal of the case against Kaikai Zhao. The other four visa fraud cases were also dismissed at the same time. The five visa fraud cases including Kaikai Zhao were identified under the China Initiative, but they were removed from the DOJ online report after their dismissals. Five “Visa Fraud” Cases he 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 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