Newsletter - #354 10/6 Meeting; NAKASEC Updates; Kin Hui/CACA; Acting Dir. Census Bureau; Gary Locke; + #354 10/6 Meeting; NAKASEC Updates; Kin Hui/CACA; Acting Dir. Census Bureau; Gary Locke; + In This Issue #354 · 2025/10/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · NAKASEC: Know Your Rights and Case Updates · Kin Hui Elected National President of C.A.C.A. · New Acting Director at Census Bureau · The Honorable Gary Locke 骆家辉 · News and Activities for the Communities 2025/10/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held on Monday, October 6, 2025, starting at 1:55 pm ET.In addition to updates from: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) We are honored by and welcome the following distinguished speakers: · Mike German , Retired Fellow, Liberty & National Security, Brennan Center for Justice · Margaret Lewis , Professor, Seton Hall University School of Law · Pat Eddington , Senior Fellow, Homeland Security and Civil Liberties, Cato Institute Mike German has announced his retirement. A former special agent with the FBI, his work focuses on law enforcement and intelligence oversight and reform. Before joining the Brennan Center in 2014, German served as the policy counsel for national security and privacy for the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington legislative office. Mike’s latest book, Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within (The New Press, 2025), issues a wake-up call about law enforcement’s dangerously lax approach to far-right violence. The book shows how systemic racism persists within police forces, and it urges more strategic and focused approaches to address the problems. He will reflect on his exemplary career of courage and integrity, as well as his thoughts on civil liberty, national security, and current state of the country, including possible comments on the C100-USCET-APA Justice webinar series. Maggie Lewis's research focuses on China and Taiwan with an emphasis on criminal justice and human rights as well as on legal issues in the U.S.-China relationship. She is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and serves on the National Committee on United States-China Relations Board of Directors, for which she is also a Public Intellectual Program fellow. She has been a Fulbright Senior Scholar at National Taiwan University, a visiting professor at Academia Sinica, a consultant to the Ford Foundation, and a delegate to the U.S.-Japan Foundation’s U.S.-Japan Leadership Program. She is also a nonresident affiliated scholar of New York University (NYU) School of Law’s U.S.-Asia Law Institute. Maggie just spent part of 2025 on sabbatical as a Visiting Academic Researcher with the Melbourne Law School's Asian Law Center. She returns to update us on her activities and share her perspectives on the C100-USCET-APA Justice webinar series and how organizations and communities might work together. Pat Eddington brings a wealth of experience to the Cato Institute after serving nearly a decade as a military imagery analyst at the CIA during a critical period of global change and later as a senior policy adviser on Capitol Hill, where he worked extensively on intelligence oversight, surveillance, and drone policy. He is a prolific writer and commentator, committed to advancing government transparency, protecting civil liberties, and ensuring accountability in national security policy. Pat returns to update us on his latest activities and current affairs of our nation, including possible comments on the C100-USCET-APA Justice webinar series.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 . NAKASEC: Know Your Rights and Case Updates On September 24, 2025, National Korean American Service and Education Consortium (NAKASEC) conducted Bystander Training on how to safely intervene when encountering Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions in public spaces, support targeted individuals, and document enforcement activities, all while protecting personal safety and abiding by the law.Whether it is witnessing a detention, documenting an ICE checkpoint, or supporting someone facing questioning, the webinar informed participants with intervention strategies that promote dignity, safety, and solidarity with our immigrant neighbors, friends, family, and co-workers.NAKASEC has also created a web page with Know Your Rights information in both English and Korean, as well as a 24/7 Hotline: 1-844-500-3222 to provide live confidential assistance in English and Korean. Visit https://nakasec.org/resources/know-your-rights/ for additional information. 1. Update on ICE Raid of Hyundai-LG Plant in Georgia On September 24, 2025, The New York Times reported that in early September, more than 300 South Korean engineers working on Hyundai’s $7.6 billion electric vehicle and battery plant in Georgia were swept up in what U.S. officials called the largest-ever Homeland Security raid at a single site. Many had entered on short-term business or tourist visas—a “gray zone” often used because of U.S. labor shortages and visa limits.The engineers—many highly skilled in battery and factory construction—were shackled, held in harsh conditions, and accused of visa violations, despite their work supporting a project expected to create thousands of U.S. jobs. Detainees described mistreatment, including inadequate food, lack of translators, and even racist gestures, prompting a South Korean government investigation.“My main takeaway is that America is not a safe place to work. I don’t think I would go there again to work,” Park Sun-kyu said.“Not even prisoners of war would be treated as badly as hundreds of Korean workers detained by US immigration authorities,” said South Korea’s Labor Minister Kim Younghoon said.According to NAKASEC, most of the Korean workers have now returned home, but many others—from Chile, Colombia, Guatemala, Ecuador, Mexico, and Venezuela—remain detained. NAKASEC emphasized that this raid, like others, reveals that the Trump administration’s actions are not about legality or safety but about targeting non-white, immigrant communities and spreading fear. The group continues to call for the immediate release of all workers and a permanent end to workplace raids. 2. Update on Tae Heung “Will” Kim Tae Heung “Will” Kim , a 40-year-old Ph.D. student at Texas A&M and green card holder since age five, was detained by ICE at San Francisco International Airport on July 21, 2025, after returning from his brother’s wedding in South Korea. The detention stemmed from a 2011 misdemeanor marijuana charge that had already been sealed.According to The Battalion , the student newspaper of Texas A&M University since 1893, while in ICE custody, Will Kim faced harsh conditions, including being confined to office-like spaces without proper sleeping arrangements, denied daylight, and moved between multiple states. Advocates note that his legal rights were not fully respected, and the prolonged detention far exceeded standard regulatory limits.Kim ’s case has drawn attention from advocacy groups such as NAKASEC, Adoptees for Justice, and the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), who argue that his detention exemplifies the broader impacts of aggressive immigration policies on international students and researchers. Kim, a scientist working on Lyme disease prevention, is seen as making significant contributions to public health, and supporters warn that his continued detention hampers important research. His case has prompted petitions and calls for action, emphasizing the psychological, educational, and societal consequences of detaining legal permanent residents like Kim, as well as the chilling effect on international students considering study and research opportunities in the U.S. Kin Hui Elected National President of C.A.C.A. The Chinese American Citizens Alliance (C.A.C.A., 美洲同源會) is one of the oldest continuous civil rights organizations in the United States. Founded in 1895 in San Francisco, it has worked for more than a century to uplift Chinese Americans by promoting ethics and values, defending the full rights and responsibilities of American citizenship, fostering patriotism, preserving cultural heritage, and educating future leaders. Today, C.A.C.A. has grown into a national organization with local lodges across many U.S. cities.From September 5–7, 2025, C.A.C.A. held its 58th National Biennial Convention at its National Headquarters in San Francisco under the theme “From Exclusion to Empowerment: Shaping a Just Future.” At the conclusion of the convention, Kin Hui and Rick Eng were elected National President and Executive Vice President, respectively. “Established in 1895, at a time when we were excluded [the Chinese Exclusion Act was not repealed until 1943], the C.A.C.A. was founded by young visionaries to advocate for the rights of Chinese American citizens. Today, it is our time to act boldly and shape a just future,” Kin Hui said in his press statement. One of his calls to action is to defend birthright citizenship. As early as 1940, C.A.C.A. was guiding members and the broader Chinese American community on their rights under the 14th Amendment and defending their American citizenship : https://bit.ly/3VFn61i . Today's climate echoes that past, with renewed threats to birthright citizenship. C.A.C.A. passed a resolution during the National Convention to push back against efforts to undermine the 14th Amendment and protect the rights of Chinese Americans.On September 26, 2025, major media including AP News , CNN , NBC News , New York Times , and Politico reported that the Trump Administration asked the Supreme Court to uphold President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship—the long-standing principle that children born in the U.S. are automatically citizens.President Trump issued the order on his first day in office, but it has been blocked by the courts. Four federal judges have ruled that it clearly violates the 14th Amendment and established precedent. The leading case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), affirmed that a child born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrant parents was a U.S. citizen.If the justices take up the case, the Supreme Court could hear arguments in its new term beginning in early October, with a decision likely by June or July 2026. New Acting Director at Census Bureau According to AP News , NPR , and other media reports, George Cook , a Trump administration appointee, has been selected to serve as Acring Director of the U.S. Census Bureau. He assumes the interim leadership role previously held by career economist Ron Jarmin , who returns to his position as Deputy Director. Cook also serves as the Commerce Department’s Acting Undersecretary for Economic Affairs — the post overseeing the Census Bureau — and as chief of staff to that office. Before joining the administration, Cook worked as an institutional investor and economic analyst. This leadership shift follows the January resignation of Rob Santos , who had been appointed by President Biden in 2022 to a five-year term as Census Bureau Director. Since then, the Trump administration has also disbanded or scaled back advisory committees of statisticians, demographers, and community stakeholders, reducing external oversight and expert input.The timing is significant: President Donald Trump has renewed calls for a new census that would exclude undocumented immigrants from apportionment counts. Such an effort faces steep legal and operational hurdles under existing law (the Census Act) and constitutional protections (14th Amendment). Meanwhile, Census employees cite worsening staffing shortages and budget cuts that could undermine the bureau’s ability to deliver accurate, reliable data.The appointment has drawn sharp criticism. “The appointment of someone serving as the chief of staff — who is necessarily and understandably a political loyalist — as the director of the largest statistical agency, without the necessary qualifications the law requires, is extremely worrisome,” said Terri Ann Lowenthal , a veteran census consultant and former House oversight subcommittee staff director. “The usual process would be to keep the career acting director in place until the administration identifies an individual qualified to be the permanent director.”President Trump's firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner following the release of a weaker-than-expected jobs report in August also sparked alarm about political interference with key federal data. The Honorable Gary Locke The Honorable Gary Locke 骆家辉 is a featured speaker in the inaugural webinar titled "Bridging Nations: People-to-People Exchange in U.S. China Relations" on Thursday, October 16, 2025, starting at 8:00 PM ET. As Governor of Washington, Gary Locke oversaw the creation of 280,000 new private sector jobs. He also had the most diverse cabinet in state history and over half his judicial appointees were women. His management skills and innovations won him acclaim by nationally recognized organizations, including Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. During his tenure, Washington was ranked one of America’s four best managed states. As Commerce Secretary, he led President Obama’s National Export Initiative to double American exports; assumed a troubled 2010 Census but which under his supervision ended on time and $2 billion under budget; and achieved the most significant reduction in patent application processing in the agency’s history. As U.S. Ambassador to China, he opened markets for made-in-USA goods and services; reduced wait times for visa interviews of Chinese applicants from 100 days to 3; and through the Embassy’s air quality monitoring program, exposed the severity of China’s air pollution. Beyond his public achievements, Gary Locke’s story is deeply personal. The son of Chinese immigrants, he grew up in Seattle’s Yesler Terrace public housing. His father, a World War II veteran and small business owner, and his mother, who spoke little English, instilled in him the values of hard work and education. Gary often recalls doing homework in his family’s restaurant, where he learned early lessons about perseverance and responsibility that shaped his career in public service.Governor Locke is Board Chair of Committee of 100. Register to attend the webinar by scanning the QR code above or clicking this link : https://bit.ly/20251016Webinar News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/10/01 C100: Obstacles and Opportunities in Media and Entertainment2025/10/03 Covering China—Journalism, Scholarship, and the Global Conversation2025/10/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/10/07 Convervations, Recollections, Pioneers and Heros: David Henry Hwang2025/10/16 Bridging Nations: The Power of People-to-People Exchange in U.S.-China Relations2025/10/23 C100 Asian American Career Ceilings Initiative: Asian American Women in the LawVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. C100 Conversations: David Henry Hwang WHAT : Conversations, Recollections, Pioneers and Heros: David Henry Hwang WHEN : October 7, 2025, 6:00 pm - 6:45 pm ET WHERE : Online event HOST : Committee of 100 Moderator: Peter Young , CEO and President of Young & Partners; Committee of 100 New York Regional Chair and Board Member Speaker : David Henry Hwang , playwright, librettist, and screenwriter DESCRIPTION : David Henry Hwang is an American playwright, librettist, screenwriter, and theater professor at Columbia University in New York City. He has won three Obie Awards for his plays FOB, Golden Child, and Yellow Face. He has one Tony Award (M. Butterfly) and three other nominations (Golden Child, Flower Drum Song, and Yellow Face), as well as a Grammy Award (Ainadamar) and one other nomination (Soft Power). Three of his works (M. Butterfly, Yellow Face, and Soft Power) have been finalists for the Pulitzer Prize for Drama. REGISTRATION : https://bit.ly/4nLsnAf # # # 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 September 30, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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

Newsletter - #196: Florida Hearing Today; TikTok Ban Lawsuit; Chinese Scientists; NASEM Roundtable; More #196: Florida Hearing Today; TikTok Ban Lawsuit; Chinese Scientists; NASEM Roundtable; More In This Issue #196 TODAY, July 18: Federal Court Argument Over Florida’s New Discriminatory Housing Law Texas’ TikTok Ban Hit With First Amendment Lawsuit Who Needs Chinese Scientists? America Does National Academies Roundtable Proceedings News and Activities for the Communities TODAY, July 18: Federal Court Argument Over Florida’s New Discriminatory Housing Law WHAT: The U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Florida will hear arguments in Shen v. Simpson . A press conference with the legal team and community leaders will follow. CONTACT : Dr. Jim Moyer, Press Secretary jimmoyer1956@gmail.com Attorney Echo King, President echokinglaw@yahoo.com Allegra Harpootlian, 303-748-4051, aharpootlian@aclu.org WHEN: Tuesday, July 18, 1:30 p.m. ET WHERE: Joseph Woodrow Hatchett U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building, 111 N. Adams St., Tallahassee, Florida Court information: https://www.flnd.uscourts.gov/tallahassee On July 18, 2023, the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Florida will hear arguments in Shen v. Simpson, a lawsuit challenging Senate Bill 264, a new Florida law banning many Chinese immigrants, including people here lawfully as professors, students, employees, and scientists, from buying a home in large swaths of the state. This law also unfairly discriminates against immigrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, Iran, Russia, and North Korea, but it singles out people from China for especially draconian restrictions and harsher criminal penalties. The lawsuit Shen v. Simpson was filed on May 22, 2023, by four Chinese immigrants who live, work, study, and raise families in Florida, but are now prohibited from purchasing real estate there, as well as a local real estate firm whose business will be affected. The plaintiffs are asking the judge for a preliminary injunction to immediately block the law and declare it unconstitutional.The Chinese immigrants and real estate firm are represented by the DeHeng Law Offices PC, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Florida, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), and the law firm Quinn Emanuel in conjunction with the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA). On June 27, the United States Department of Justice filed an amicus brief in support of plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction challenging this prejudicial new law. Nineteen other groups have also express their support for the injunction. Ashley Gorski from ACLU and Clay Zhu from DeHeng Law Office will be in court arguing that this law violates the plaintiffs’ constitutional right to equal protection under the law and codifies and expands housing discrimination against people of Asian descent — something expressly forbidden by the Fair Housing Act. Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA) and the Yick Wo Institution will hold a protest rally on July 18, denouncing the discriminatory SB 264 “Interests of Foreign Countries” Act. This demonstration will consist of a multiracial, multi-state coalition of concerned citizens, some of whom will be traveling in “freedom buses” to Tallahassee the morning of the hearing to support the civil rights of all US citizens and residents.Reminiscent of the “freedom rides” of the 1960s civil rights movement, these protestors have embraced the color YELLOW to symbolize the fight for the rights of the AAPI community.Those attending the rally in front of the courthouse will be wearing yellow.FAAJA was created after many Chinese Floridians, Chinese American groups, and countless other supporters protested in Tallahassee on April 19, 2023, against the passage of this bill,which violates Floridians’ civil rights and liberties. Despite FAAJA’s efforts, this unjust bill was signed into law on May 8, 2023, and took effect on July 1, 2023.This Tallahassee rally is supported by many major organizations with diverse backgrounds including APA Justice Task Force, Committee of 100 (C100), Chinese for Affirmative Action (CAA), Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), Greater Houston League of United Latin American Citizens (GH LULAC), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Stop AAPI Hate, United Chinese Americans (UCA) and more.The time and location of the press conference will be announced later.FAAJA hereby urges the court to rule in favor of the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary injunction and against this unfair treatment of certain targeted groups of people based on their race and country of origin.Read more coverage of the hearing by APA Justice: https://www.apajustice.org/ 2023/07/11 Shen v. Simpson Document 65: Plaintiffs' Report in Support of Their motion for a Preliminary Injunction . Update on Alien Land Bills On June 27, 2023, Louisiana Governor signed House Bill 537 into state law. It becomes effective on August 1, 2023.Follow the tracking map and state-by-state list of alien land bills at https://bit.ly/43oJ0YI . Read APA Justice's full coverage of Alien Land Bills: https://bit.ly/43epBcl Texas’ TikTok Ban Hit With First Amendment Lawsuit According to a press statement on July 13, 2023, researchers and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University have filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Coalition for Independent Technology Research, asserting that Texas’s TikTok ban, initially imposed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott last year, violates the First Amendment. The ban requires all state agencies, including public universities, to bar employees from downloading or using TikTok on state-owned or -issued devices or networks, as well as on personal devices used to conduct state business. The lawsuit challenges the ban’s application to public university faculty, asserting that it compromises academic freedom and impedes vital research. The Coalition for Independent Technology Research is a group of academics, journalists, civil society researchers, and community scientists that works to advance, defend, and sustain the right to study the impact of technology on society. The coalition’s members include professors at public universities in Texas whose research and teaching have been compromised by the ban. Texas is not the only state to have enacted a TikTok ban of one kind or another. At least 35 states have banned TikTok on state devices and networks. State university systems or universities in 20 states have banned TikTok on university devices, university networks, or both. Montana passed a ban in May 2023; two lawsuits have been filed challenging that law, one by TikTok and another by TikTok users. Coalition for Independent Technology Research v. Abbott (1:23-cv-00783) was filed with the Western District of Texas Austin Division.Read the press statement by the Knight First Amendment Institute : https://bit.ly/43r7W0Q Who Needs Chinese Scientists? America Does According to an opinion published by LA Progressive on July 11, 2023, outside the halls of Congress, where alarm bells constantly go off about the Chinese threat, scientists, research laboratory directors, and university officials recognize what a resource the Chinese scientists are. Xie Xiaoliang is one of Harvard’s premier scientists, a biophysical chemist known for his work on DNA. He’s leaving Harvard to take an academic position in his home country, China, one of about 1400 top Chinese scientists who in recent years have given up their US positions and returned to China.The reason is not so much China’s “Thousand Talents” program, which seeks to entice scientists to return home with promises of lucrative academic and research positions. It’s the lingering effects of the Trump and Biden justice department’s China Initiative.That program sought—with outstanding failure—to weed out Chinese scientists, including Chinese Americans, who were supposedly committing economic espionage. The University of Michigan’s president was among many major university leaders who wrote to the US attorney general to complain about the unfairness of the China Initiative, pointing out its racial profiling, lack of evidence of wrongdoing, and pressure on the university to “investigate researchers who are singled out only because of their personal or professional connections with China.” The open letter was signed by the overwhelming majority of Michigan faculty.The China Initiative has ended, but the careers of a number of prominent scientists of Chinese descent in the US were ruined or set back. Fear stalks Chinese visitors and citizens alike. Put simply, the scientific research of Chinese scientists is crucial to international scientific collaboration ( Karin Fischer , The Chronicle of Higher Education, Latitudes, June 14, 2023).There is, to be sure, reason for caution on national security grounds. Concern about research findings here being conveyed to the Chinese military is real. U.S. universities are well aware of the problem and have developed guidelines for collaborative research with security implications. But overwhelmingly, the view at universities and research facilities is that our society and economy would pay a high price if Chinese scientists were suddenly barred from entry. That means US “visa processes should be streamlined, backlogs cleared and talented individuals given expanded opportunities to obtain green cards,” says one writer long involved in promoting US-China ties.Congress isn’t listening, however; right-wing members, with some support from liberals, believe any contact with Chinese scientists is a national security danger. Recently, 10 Republicans on Rep. Mike Gallagher ’s special committee on China wrote Secretary of State Antony Blinken to urge that the U.S. scrap the 1979 US-China Science and Technology Agreement, which is up for renewal. That agreement supports cooperation on many scientific projects in agriculture, physics, and the atmosphere, among other areas. Let’s remember that no one appreciates academic freedom more than visitors from China and other countries under authoritarian rule. When that freedom is violated by harassment and suspicion, word gets back to China very quickly, and the rewards for returning to China, in money and prestige, become tantalizing. Academic freedom is under assault in the U.S. for other reasons these days. It is in our self-interest to protect it from those who really don’t have the national interest at heart. Mel Gurtov , author of the opinion, is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Portland State University (Oregon) and (from 1994 to 2017) Editor-in-Chief of Asian Perspective, an international affairs quarterly. Read the LA Progressive opinion: https://bit.ly/3XPJBAO Science : New Chinese journal gains impact. According to Science on July 13, 2023, just 3 years after launch, The Innovation , a China-based, English language journal, has made a splash. Last month, it notched a citation impact factor of 32.1—behind only Nature ’s 64.8 and Science ’s 56.9 among multidisciplinary journals—in the annual Journal Citation Reports released by the Clarivate analytics company. A group of young Chinese scientists pooled their savings to get the open-access journal up and running, according to the South China Morning Post , which first reported the story. Despite producing nearly 30% of the world’s reviewed scientific papers, China has produced few highly ranked journals. At least two-thirds of The Innovation ’s published papers come from China-based corresponding authors. It accepts only about 13% of submissions; acceptance rates at Science and Nature are below 10%. Read the Science report: https://bit.ly/44vIyss National Academies Roundtable Proceedings On November 14 and 15, 2022, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) convened a two-day workshop under the auspices of the National Science, Technology, and Security Roundtable to assess the state of the U.S. research enterprise in a time of increasing global competition. The workshop also featured discussion of the challenges confronting researchers as they seek to ensure the vitality of research and innovation in America, foster increased international scientific research cooperation, and simultaneously counter illicit foreign interference that threatens national security interests. This publication summarizes the presentation and discussion of the workshop.Read the proceedings of the NASEM workshop: https://bit.ly/3K4zWR4 News and Activities for the Communities 1. Asian American Tech Worker Filed Suit According to NBC News on July 12, 2023, A former Asian American employee is suing the Silicon Valley tech company Lumentum, alleging that a yearslong pattern of racism ended with his termination when he tried to speak out. Andre Wong , 52, filed the complaint in the Santa Clara Superior Court on June 30, seeking $20 million in damages. His suit comes amid others by tech workers who say they’re pushing against the “bamboo ceiling,” barriers that have kept Asians from advancing to high-level leadership positions. Read the NBC News report: https://nbcnews.to/44JXId0 . 2. First Asian American Miss Texas speaks out against Gov. Abbott’s attack on diversity programs According to AsAmNews on July 8, 2023, Miss Texas is asking Governor Greg Abbott and other conservative lawmakers to stop their assault on DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) programs in the state. Last year, Averie Bishop became the first Asian American to win Miss Texas and went on to compete in the Miss America competition. Since then, she has been using her platform to promote the idea that “Y’all means All.” MSNBC published an Op-Ed written by Bishop that addressed attacks on DEI policies from conservative Texas state lawmakers. The Texas Senate recently passed S.B. 17, in April. The bill bans diversity equity inclusion departments in public universities. The Op-Ed also comes after a recent U.S. Supreme Court deemed affirmative action programs in university admissions unlawful. Bishop wrote that she worried that the state’s “most vulnerable populations” would be ostracized without DEI policies. She believes the policies are essential to building a better Texas. Bishop herself is a first-generation law school graduate. Her mother was a Filipino immigrant. Growing up, she was one of just two visibly Asian students at her school. Now, she sees a different Texas.Bishop said she’s disappointed that many lawmakers do not want to celebrate that diversity. “Gov. Greg Abbott and state leadership must cease its assault on DEI policy and focus on improving the economic and social livelihood of all of us,” Bishop wrote.Read the AsAmNews report: https://bit.ly/3PZxSxB . Read the MSNBC op-ed: https://on.msnbc.com/43rMVn1 Back View PDF July 18, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #158 Congressional Reception; 01/09 Meeting; Arrowood; Haoyang Yu; Thomas Keon; More News #158 Congressional Reception; 01/09 Meeting; Arrowood; Haoyang Yu; Thomas Keon; More News In This Issue #158 Justice for Sherry Chen 陈霞芬 Congressional Reception 2023/01/09 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Update on the Arrowood Nomination The Intercept Report on The Case of Haoyang Yu 于浩洋 Purdue University Northwest Chancellor Thomas Keon Asian American and Scientific Community News Justice for Sherry Chen 陈霞芬 Congressional Reception On December 13, 2022, "Justice for Sherry Chen Congressional Reception" was held on Capitol Hill in honor of her historic settlement and in appreciation for the many elected officials, community organizations and leaders, and grass-roots individuals who supported her 10-year fight for justice. Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Chair Judy Chu and Whip Ted Lieu led the opening remarks. They also led the first Capitol Hill press conference on Sherry's case going back to May 2015. During the 10-year span, Sherry courageously stood her ground and won three judicial battles - having her unjust criminal case dropped by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2015, winning the appeal to reverse the discriminatory termination of her employment against the Department of Commerce (DOC) in 2018, and settling the lawsuit against DOJ and DOC with a historic amount of over $1.5 million in 2022. In addition to CAPAC, Sherry was helped by the leadership of Maryland State Senator Susan Lee who mobilized the Asian American and scientific communities nationwide in successfully calling for a congressional hearing on racial profiling and the plight of Asian American scientists. Sherry gave a compelling testimony in the 2021 Congressional Roundtable titled “Researching while Chinese American: Ethnic Profiling, Chinese American Scientists and a New American Brain Drain” chaired by Rep. Jamie Raskin of the House Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and joined by CAPAC. The YouTube video of the Roundtable has received more than 14,000 views. Sherry was also helped by an investigation led by Senator Roger Wicker which revealed abuse and misconduct at multiple levels of the DOC stemming from the rogue Investigations and Threat Management Service, including the profiling of DOC Asian American employees for as many as 15 years. Dozens of participants came from as far as California and across the U.S. to join the event. More descriptions and photos about the reception are being added to the APA Justice webpage on Sherry Chen at: http://bit.ly/APAJ_Sherry_Chen The LinkedIn post of MIT Technology Review report on Sherry Chen and her historic settlement has received over 48,000 views so far: http://bit.ly/3GZCOxQ Watch the Chinese-language report by Voice of America on the 2015 Capitol Hill press conference (美议员怀疑陈霞芬间谍案有族裔因素) here: https://youtu.be/CBsEx-A_yUw (video 2:43) 01/09/2023 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held on Monday, January 9, 2023. Invited speakers to help us bring in the new year are: Judy Chu, Chair, Congressional Asian Pacific American (Invited) Sherry Chen, Hydrologist, U.S. Department of Commerce (Confirmed) Haipei Shue, President, United Chinese Americans (Invited) Vincent Wang, Chair, Ohio Chinese American Association; Co-organizer, APA Justice (Confirmed) Patrick Toomey, Deputy Director, and Ashley Gorski, Senior Staff Attorney, ACLU (Invited) John Trasvina, Civil Rights Attorney; Former Principal Legal Advisor, Department of Homeland Security; Former Dean of the University of San Francisco School of Law (Confirmed) John Yang, President and Executive Director, Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC The virtual monthly meeting is by invitation only. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Steven Pei, Vincent Wang, and Jeremy Wu - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . Read past monthly meeting summaries here: https://bit.ly/3kxkqxP . Update on the Arrowood Nomination The 117th Congress ended on January 3, 2023, without action by the Senate on the nomination of Mr. Casey Arrowood to become the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee.We are grateful to the Senate Judiciary Committee senators and staff who heard concerns from Asian Americans in Tennessee and throughout the nation about Mr. Arrowood's record carrying out the “China Initiative” and unjustly prosecuting University of Tennessee Knoxville (UTK) Professor Anming Hu 胡安明. Throughout 2022, we expressed our serious concerns to Congress and the White House about Department of Justice attorneys refiling charges that the trial judge concluded "no rational jury" would convict.The Biden Administration has the option to renominate Mr. Arrowood in the 118th Congress, an action the Asian American community will continue to steadfastly oppose.The White House has three additional options instead of renominating Mr. Arrowood for the position of U.S. Attorney: Nominate the current U.S. Attorney Francis (Trey) Hamilton, III for the position Do not nominate anyone for the position and permit Mr. Hamilton to remain in office Restart the entire process and nominate someone other than Mr. Hamilton or Mr. Arrowood The Arrowood nomination was unacceptable and remains unacceptable because of his involvement in the conduct of the investigation of Professor Hu, bringing the faulty charges, and intending to refile the charges that prompted Judge Varlan to issue an acquittal. According to the following chronological records, Mr. Hamilton is the current U.S. Attorney who was appointed by the U.S. District Court of Eastern Tennessee, not the White House. Mr. Hamilton will serve in this capacity until the vacancy is filled by a Presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed nominee. In his role of Acting U.S. Attorney at that time, Mr. Hamilton might have an even larger role than Mr. Arrowood in the decision to approve or direct the prosecutorial actions against Professor Hu. For example, Mr. Hamilton reportedly joined the presentation by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to UTK with Mr. Arrowood in September 2019, in which the FBI made false accusations of Professor Hu of being a spy for China and an agent of China's military. 2017/11/21 Mr. James Douglas Overbey sworn in as US Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee2018/11/01 Department of Justice (DOJ) launched the now-defunct "China Initiative"2020/02/25 Professor Anming Hu indicted with Mr. Casey Arrowood as the lead prosecutor2021/01/20 The Joe Biden administration began2021/02/28 Mr. Overbey resigned2021/03/01 Mr. Trey Hamilton became Acting US Attorney 2021/06/07 Professor Hu became the first academic to go to trial under the "China Initiative"2021/06/16 Mistrial of Professor Hu declared2021/06/17 Reps. Ted Lieu, Mondaire Jones, and Pramila Jayapal requested DOJ/OIG investigation2021/07/30 DOJ announced its intent to retry Professor Hu2021/09/09 Professor Hu acquitted of all charges2021/12/26 Mr. Hamilton appointed US Attorney by the U.S. District Court of Eastern Tennessee2022/02/23 DOJ ended the “China Initiative”2022/08/01 White House nominated Mr. Arrowood to be US Attorney2023/01/03 The Arrowood nomination expired without action by the Senate The Intercept Report on The Case of Haoyang Yu 于浩洋 On December 22, 2022, The Intercept published "CHIPPED AWAY: A Competitor Put the FBI on Haoyang Yu's Trail. The Investigation Didn't Go as Planned." According to the report, Massachusetts engineer Haoyang Yu, who came under investigation after a competitor told the FBI that his semiconductor chip company "smells a bit fishy." A sprawling, four-agency federal investigation ensued. Believing they had a sensitive technology case involving China, where Yu was born, agents mounted a hidden camera outside his home, rifled through his trash, and followed his wife as she brought their kids to and from sports practice. But the investigation didn't go as planned. An attempted sting failed. Nor did the investigation uncover solid evidence of crimes involving China. In June, a jury acquitted Yu of 18 of 19 charges. His lawyers are now asking a federal judge to throw out the last charge, arguing that Yu, a US citizen, was targeted because of his ethnicity at a moment when the Justice Department was charting plans for the fraught "China Initiative."Read more about The Intercept report: https://bit.ly/3vc59dh . Read more about the story of Haoyang Yu: https://bit.ly/APAJ_HaoyangYu Purdue University Northwest Chancellor Thomas Keon According to CNN on December 23, 2022, the Purdue Board of Trustees issued a formal reprimand to Purdue University Northwest (PNW) Chancellor Thomas Keon in response to a racist comment he made during a commencement ceremony on December 10, 2022. The board’s chair, Mike Berghoff, called Keon’s statements “extremely offensive and insensitive.” The decision to reprimand Keon, rather than dismiss him, has spurred criticism from other faculty. In an open letter addressed to the trustees, PNW Faculty Senate Chairman Thomas Roach further called on the university to dismiss the chancellor. “We are not demanding his removal to punish him, we require his removal because he is not qualified to represent us,” wrote Roach. He called Keon’s ongoing role “an insult to the Asian community.” “This decision by the board of trustees is negligent and unacceptable, and your explanation for your inaction insults our intelligence,” he went on. The PNW Faculty Senate cast a vote of no-confidence for the chancellor. Keon received 20 votes of confidence and 135 votes of no-confidence. His “inexcusable behavior caused national and international outrage” and insulted the Asian American and Pacific Islander community, including faculty, staff, and students at Purdue Northwest, the Faculty Senate said in an open letter sent to Keon. On December 16, 2022, the PNW chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) condemned Chancellor Keon's remarks in a press release. According to the statement, Chancellor Keon's response "suggests, at best, a highly troublesome level of ignorance, insensitivity, and lack of judgement on his part. But it is more than any personal racism by one particular university official; it suggests the all-but-complete ignorance of the institutionalized racism faced by Asians and other peoples of color in this country." The statement concludes that " the time has come for Chancellor Keon to resign, or else to be removed by the Purdue University Board of Trustees, so that a leader better attuned to what it takes to engage multiple constituencies with respect–not ridicule–can be found." According to an opinion by Diverse Education , PNW Chancellor Keon's mockery of an "Asian" language is "emblematic of a wider problem in American higher education." Multiple Asian American organizations are outraged and continue to call for Keon's resignation, including the Japanese American Citizens League and an open letter demanding accountability from Purdue University: https://bit.ly/3vtyjVG . Asian American and Scientific Community News and Activities Science Calls for Appointment of NIH Director Now. On December 16, 2022, Science published an editorial titled "Appoint a new NIH director, now." There has been a failure to confirm a new director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) since Francis Collins stepped down a year ago. According to the editorial, Lawrence Tabak has been the interim NIH director, but it is time for some new faces after the lengthy Collins administration. Tabak was an NIH deputy director and the deputy ethics counselor under Collins. It’s unclear who or what is holding up the nomination. Is the White House simply incapable of deciding whom to nominate, or more likely, has it been distracted by other matters? Either is possible, but both are indefensible. The editorial concludes that "[t]he Biden campaign leveraged the support of the scientific community to win the presidency. Leaving the most visible science position open for a year is a betrayal of that support. President Biden must personally intervene to correct this now." APA Justice nominated Dr. David D. Ho 何大一 to the White House as a candidate to become the 17th NIH Director in November 2021. Read more about the Science editorial: https://bit.ly/3VgpHMh Stanford Center on China’s Economy and Institutions (SCCEI). On December 1, 2022, SCCEI published a brief on "What Is the Impact of U.S.-China Tensions on U.S. Science?" revealing that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) investigations into hundreds of U.S. scientists in two years (2019-2020) have brought about a 1.9% decline in the publication rate and a 7.1% decline in the citation rate of U.S. scientists with collaborators in China, compared with U.S. scientists who had collaborated with scientists in other countries. The adverse effects of the investigations were observed across many U.S. institutions of higher education, particularly salient for scientists of Asian heritage, fields that receive more funding from the NIH, and fields with a higher concentration of U.S.-China collaborations. In fields more affected by the NIH investigations, the U.S. and China both produced fewer publications during 2019 and 2020 compared to the rest of the world, suggesting that U.S.-China political tensions affect overall scientific progress. Qualitative interviews with 12 scientists suggest that a reluctance to start or continue collaborations with China partners and the resulting loss in research talent and access to labs and equipment may drive longer-term declines in publication quality and quality. The study was based on publication records of 102,000 medical and life scientists in the U.S. between 2010 and 2020. On December 9, 2022, the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) hosted a webinar where SCCEI authors presented their methodology and findings of the study. Read more about the SCCEI study at https://stanford.io/3YWoLje . Watch the CSIS video and dsicussions here: https://bit.ly/3hSZdTJ 2,200 Chinese Exclusion Act Case Files Digitized and Now Online . Initially set to ban immigration of Chinese laborers to the United States for ten years, the Chinese Exclusions Act was extended and expanded to all Chinese persons and became permanent law in 1902. It was repealed in 1943. Under the leadership of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), Congress condemned the discriminatory laws in 2012. According to Federal News Network on December 27, 2022, more than 2,200 Chinese Exclusion Act case files held by the National Archives at Riverside, California, are now available online in the National Archives Catalog, thanks to a collaboration with the Chinese Historical Society of Southern California. The project began in 2018. Professors and students from California State University, San Bernardino, and the University of California at Riverside joined the team. National Archives at Riverside staff trained the student interns, who digitized 56,507 documents using donated scanners. These records document the movement of Chinese immigrants and Chinese Americans in and out of the United States during the exclusion era. Around 10 percent of Riverside’s Chinese Exclusion Act case files have been digitized. 692 citizen archivists have transcribed over 25,000 pages of the records so far. Read more at https://bit.ly/3I2iMn7 Subscribe to The APA Justice Newsletter Complete this simple form at https://bit.ly/2FJunJM to subscribe. Please share it with those who wish to be informed and join the fight. View past newsletters here: https://bit.ly/APAJ_Newsletters . Back View PDF January 3, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

1. From Past Prejudice to Present Policy: The Impact of Land Ownership Exclusion Laws on Diverse Communities 2024-2025 Alien Land Laws Wednesday, December 11, 2024 An insightful discussion on the troubling resurgence of alien land laws — historically discriminatory policies that are reemerging in state legislatures across the U.S. Originally designed to prevent non-citizens, particularly those from AAPI communities, from owning property, these laws are now being reframed as safeguards to national resources. We discussed whether these laws properly address national security concerns or whether they are merely a pretext that infringes upon civil rights and liberties under the guise of protection. Our panel of legal experts and advocates delved into the history of alien land laws, examine their renewed impact on vulnerable communities and discuss key cases, including a bill recently introduced in Florida. Whether you’re a policymaker, legal professional, journalist, or concerned citizen, this event was essential for anyone committed to upholding justice and equity in America. Previous Item Next Item

Chinese American? Who is a Chinese American? What is the Chinese American population? These questions may appear simple on the surface, but they are subject to definitions and interpretations. They have also evolved over time. Defining Chinese American For data collection purposes, the Office of Management and Budget is the official authority to define racial and ethnic categories for the United States. Today, Chinese American is a sub-category of Asian American, defined as "A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam." This government definition generally reflects a recognized social definition. It is not an attempt to define race biologically, anthropologically, or genetically, nor is it linked to the standard geographical definitions. In practice, an individual associates his or her race and ethnicity by self-identification. The U.S. Census Bureau produces official statistics on the Chinese American population according to this definition and self-identified data, which include U.S. citizens and nationals, as well as permanent residents. Under this definition and interpretation, a Chinese American may also be described as a Chinese in America. Definition used in social, legal and other applications may vary, such as the requirement of U.S. citizenship. Basic Statistics The first recorded arrival of three Chinese sailors in the U.S. travelled from Canton (now Guangzhou), China on board the ship Pallas to Baltimore, Maryland in August 1785. The first recorded Chinese immigrants arrived in the U.S. around 1820. By 1860, the census counted 34,933 Chinese living in California. More than three quarters of them were miners and laborers who first came to the U.S. during the 1848-1855 Gold Rush and then helped built and completed the First Transcontinental Railroad by 1869. The 2010 census showed that the Asian population grew faster than any other race group over the previous decade. Chinese Americans was the largest detailed Asian group, with about 3.3 million people reporting Chinese alone and an additional 700,000 people identifying as both Chinese and one or more additional detailed Asian groups and/or another race. According to the 2017 American Community Survey, the Census Bureau estimated a population of Chinese Americans of one or more races to be slightly over 5 million, or about 1.5% of the total U.S. population. Additional statistics on Chinese in America are available from, for example, the Census Bureau , the Migration Policy Institute , and the Pew Research Center . Beyond Statistics Beyond these statistics, the Chinese American population is complex as it has evolved over the past two hundred years. Several waves of immigrations have occurred; they were also severely repressed for more than 60 years under the Chinese Exclusion Act. There are American-born Chinese (ABC) whose roots have been here for generations; there are also recent naturalized citizens and immigrants of diverse economic and educational background who came from Hong Kong, Taiwan, China and the rest of the world. Not surprisingly, more in-depth understanding about the Chinese American population varies according to perspectives, experiences, and even aspirations, notably between ABCs and more recent naturalized citizens and immigrants. Two prominent Chinese American leaders of such diverse background, who have long been engaged with APA Justice, offer their views on this topic. They are: Frank H. Wu (吴华扬), William L. Prosser Distinguished Professor, University of California Hastings College of the Law and author of Yellow: Race in America Beyond Black and White . Frank was born in Cleveland, Ohio, son of Chinese immigrants from Taiwan. His paper, "The New Chinese Diaspora Embracing the Model Minority and Perpetual Foreigner? ," was orginally published in Chinese Historical Society of America: History & Perspectives . Chinese translation of the paper was made by Kathy Liu, Steve Ning, and Julia Pan. Xiaoyan Zhang (张小彥), visiting professor at University of Pittsburgh and Chair of United Chinese Americans (UCA). Xiaoyang was born in Beijing, China and came to the U.S. in the early 1980s. He is a naturalized U.S. citizen. Xiaoyan authored the UCA manifesto "From Sojourner to Citizen " in 2018 and shares a paper here "American Democracy in the Eyes of a New Immigrant from China " about his personal experience and understanding. A Chinese verison is also available. China Policy: Huaren and Huaqiao The Chinese diaspora, consisting of both Chinese living overseas who are citizens of China (huaqiao 华侨), and people of Chinese descent who are citizens of foreign countries (huaren 华人), have significantly shaped the making of modern China. China’s policy towards its diaspora is primarily governed by its national interests and foreign policy imperatives. However, the Chinese government has been careful to ensure that the huaqiao and the huaren fall into different policy domains: Chinese citizens living overseas are subject to China’s domestic policies, while Chinese descendants who are citizens of other countries come under China’s foreign affairs. Nevertheless, from the beginning, the latter continue to be regarded as kinsfolk distinct from other foreign nationals. The huaqiao-huaren distinction is often blurred in ordinary discourse and this has been a source of much misunderstanding. However, it has not been the policy of the Chinese government to blur this distinction, and it is acutely aware of the complexity of the issue and is therefore very cautious about implying any change. As such, when terms such as huaqiao-huaren are introduced in the official lexicon, they are meant to acknowledge certain historical and contemporary realities, and not to deliberately obfuscate the two categories. The use of the combined term is in fact a recognition of the clear-cut distinction between the two groups, and is meant to convey a semantic balance in which neither category is emphasized at the expense of the other. And more from below by Wu Xiaoan, professor of history at Peking University and director of its Centre for the Study of Chinese Overseas Huaren or huaqiao? Beijing respects the difference and is not coercing foreigners to toe its line China’s Evolving Policy Towards The Chinese Diaspora in Southeast Asia (1949–2018) US Policy: National, Citizenship, US Persons U.S. State Department on Dual Nationality and Citizenship : Section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) states that “the term ‘national of the United States’ means (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States.” Therefore, U.S. citizens are also U.S. nationals. Non-citizen nationality status refers only individuals who were born either in American Samoa or on Swains Island to parents who are not citizens of the United States. The concept of dual nationality means that a person is a national of two countries at the same time. Each country has its own nationality laws based on its own policy. Persons may have dual nationality by automatic operation of different laws rather than by choice. For example, a child born in a foreign country to U.S. national parents may be both a U.S. national and a national of the country of birth. Or, an individual having one nationality at birth may naturalize at a later date in another country and become a dual national. U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one nationality or another. A U.S. citizen may naturalize in a foreign state without any risk to his or her U.S. citizenship. However, persons who acquire a foreign nationality after age 18 by applying for it may relinquish their U.S. nationality if they wish to do so... Dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries, and either country has the right to enforce its laws. It is important to note the problems attendant to dual nationality. Claims of other countries upon U.S. dual-nationals often place them in situations where their obligations to one country are in conflict with the laws of the other. For data collection and national security purposes, a "U.S. person" includes citizens, lawfully admitted permanent resident aliens, and corporations incorporated in the United States. See U.S. Code § 1801 (i): https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1801 VS

Mingqing Xiao Previous Item Next Item

Newsletter - #93 Update On Campaign; Matt Olsen Confirmed; Week Of Action; Reports And Reminders #93 Update On Campaign; Matt Olsen Confirmed; Week Of Action; Reports And Reminders Back View PDF November 1, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Warrantless Surveillance Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of Americans’ and foreigners’ phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications. Information collected under the law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people , even for crimes unrelated to national security. Given our nation’s history of abusing surveillance authorities and the covert nature of the legislation, we should be concerned that FISA and Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups—whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists. Introduction This web page traces the evolution of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) from its origins as a safeguard against domestic surveillance abuses to its transformation into a powerful framework for global intelligence collection—and the profound civil liberties consequences that followed. Organized chronologically, it documents how crisis-driven expansions after 9/11 enabled warrantless surveillance authorities, how those authorities were codified through Section 702, and how practices such as “incidental collection” became normalized within U.S. intelligence operations. Critically, this evolution has had a disparate and enduring impact on Asian Americans, particularly those with familial, professional, or cultural ties across the Pacific. Because Section 702 targets non-U.S. persons abroad, communications involving Asian Americans are far more likely to be swept into government databases, queried without warrants, and treated through a lens of foreign suspicion. Over time, these dynamics have reinforced the “perpetual foreigner” stereotype, contributed to racial profiling in national security investigations, and blurred the line between foreign intelligence gathering and domestic civil rights protections. FISA and its amendments are not the only laws subject to misuse and abuse in the name of national security. The U.S. Constitution protects individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures; however, under Section 702 of FISA, the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of electronic communications. Information collected this way can be used to prosecute innocent individuals or for alleged crimes unrelated to national security. Given the nation's history of surveillance abuse and program secrecy, there is significant concern that Section 702 is and will continue to be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups, including minority communities, political activists, and journalists. The current authorization of Section 702 is set to expire on April 20, 2026. What is FISA? What is Section 702? The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, commonly abbreviated as FISA, was enacted in 1978, establishing regulated procedures for physical and electronic surveillance as a means to collect foreign intelligence information. The act was designed to create a legal framework that balanced national security needs with constitutional protections by requiring judicial oversight of domestic intelligence surveillance through a specialized court, the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). FISA’s enactment stemmed from widespread revelations of government surveillance abuses conducted in the name of national security during the Vietnam War and the Watergate era. Under the legislation, federal officials must first obtain approval from the Attorney General, Acting Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, or the Assistant Attorney General for National Security before seeking a FISC order authorizing electronic surveillance or physical searches. Section 702 is a provision of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, establishing procedures for acquiring foreign intelligence when communications travel through domestic communications infrastructure. For example, a U.S. person’s email communications could be collected if they are in contact with a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the U.S. who is in possession of “foreign intelligence information.” Under 702, the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence are authorized to make and submit to FISC written certifications for the purpose of acquiring foreign intelligence information. Essentially, this legislation allows the government to surveil noncitizens overseas without a warrant. Soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the George W. Bush Administration began a series of questionable secret surveillance practices, including warrantless domestic wiretapping. Major amendments to FISA were subsequently made to legitimize and empower some of these secret operations. FISA was transformed into massive warrantless surveillance programs shrouded in secrecy, and Chinese Americans continue to be disproportionately impacted. FISA Amendments Act of 2008 The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 added a new Title VII to FISA, authorizing targeting of non-U.S. persons outside the U.S. Section 702 details additional limitations to such surveillance, requiring that the surveillance must be conducted in a manner consistent with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Asian Americans Disproportionately Impacted Soon after the enactment of Section 702, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) declared economic espionage to be a major security threat to the U.S.In May 2017, the Committee of 100 presented a white paper, “ Prosecuting ‘Chinese Spies’: An Empirical Analysis of the Economic Espionage Act ” by legal scholar Andrew Kim of South Texas College of Law. Among other disturbing findings, the study showed an immediate spike in prosecutions against Asian Americans in 2008. A series of innocent naturalized Chinese Americans in private industry, federal government, and academia were accused of spying for China, but all of them were subsequently dismissed without explanation.Despite the heroic efforts of individuals to defend themselves against all odds, they and their families have suffered devastating damages in legal expense, emotional trauma, and reputational devastation. Serious Constitutional Issues When the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 was due for reauthorization in 2012, little was known about the warrantless, mass surveillance programs because they were shrouded in secrecy. Today, we know that even the FISA court had sharply criticized in its written opinion (declassified in April 2017) that the government reporting efforts were lacking in “institutional candor” and represent “a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.” This same FISA court has approved more than 99.5% of the government’s requests since the enactment of FISA in 1978. FISA and its amendments are not the only laws subject to misuse and abuse by the authorities in the name of national security. The magnitude of their adverse implication and impact has been difficult to assess due to the inherent secrecy and complexity; however, we do know that protection of privacy and civil liberty has been grossly inadequate under FISA and its amendments. Perspectives Supporting and Opposing FISA 702 At its core, FISA balances two opposing extremes—national security and the protection of civil liberties. This section discusses the rationale behind both support and criticism of the legislation. Support of FISA Proponents of FISA highlight the legislation's role as a crucial safeguard of American national security, emphasizing that proactive, preventative foreign intelligence surveillance protects the U.S. from critical threats. Christopher Wray, former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), advocated this position in front of the House Committee on Homeland Security in November 23, saying “loss of this vital provision, or its reauthorization in a narrowed form, would raise profound risk.” He continued, “for the FBI in particular, either outcome could mean substantially impairing, or in some cases entirely eliminating, our ability to find and disrupt many of the most serious security threats.” At the same hearing, the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) echoed these concerns, stressing the need to be able to determine “whether international terrorists could gain access to and pose a threat to the homeland.” Criticism of FISA On the other hand, opponents of FISA contend the legislation allows the U.S. government to collect sensitive information from or about U.S. citizens, threatening the integrity of the Fourth Amendment and the guaranteed civil liberties of Americans. Additionally, civil rights groups argue the legislation unfairly targets immigrants and people of color. This is not only because FISA targets individuals based on national origin, but also because immigrants are more likely to be in contact with non-U.S. citizens located abroad, and therefore their communications are more likely to be examined and investigated. On its website, the Electronic Frontier Foundation stated that FISA does not align with the intention of the American national security program, and “people on U.S. soil should not have their communications collected without a warrant.” The American Civil Liberties Union encourages people to be concerned that “Section 702 is and will be used to disproportionately target disfavored groups, whether minority communities, political activists, or even journalists.” Perspectives of Policymakers Various policymakers and political leaders have expressed conflicting views about the legislation, with some vacillating between support and criticism, underscoring the hypocrisy and political expediency often present in public office. At various times in their careers, Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard’s statements have exhibited this opportunistic behavior, and their statements are listed below. Kash Patel, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI): During FBI director Kash Patel’s confirmation hearing on January 30, 2025, Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) asked Patel whether he viewed a warrant requirement to access the stored communications of Americans to be “workable” in the FISA context. Patel responded that such a warrant requirement “would not be comportive” to protecting American citizens. In other words, Patel did not see the necessity of a warrant in accessing stored communications of Americans, and thus he supports FISA Section 702 as it is currently written. In April 2024, less than a year prior, Congress reauthorized Section 702 and expanded the government’s surveillance powers. At that time, Patel publicly criticized the law’s passage, stating that former FBI director Christopher Wray “was caught last year illegally using 702 collection methods against Americans 274,000 times,” demonstrating his dramatic change of opinion in eight months. Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence: In December 2020, Tulsi Gabbard, then U.S. Representative for Hawaii, collaborated with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky) to propose legislation limiting government surveillance of Americans. This legislation would have repealed Section 702. Additionally, Gabbard criticized the intelligence community, saying it “has not been transparent or honest with the American people or even Congress about what they’ve been doing.” However, after her nomination in early 2025, Gabbard publicly supported Section 702, referring to it as a “critical” program that “must be safeguarded to protect our nation while ensuring the civil liberties of Americans.” Recognizing her sudden apostasy, Gabbard said her “prior concerns about FISA were based on insufficient protections for civil liberties, particularly regarding the FBI’s misuse of warrantless search powers on American citizens,” citing FISA reforms enacted since then that address those issues. Impact on Asian Americans Warrantless surveillance in the U.S., conducted through legislation such as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the China Initiative, has disproportionately affected minority communities and immigrants, including many Asian Americans. This section highlights the cases of Angwang, Xiaoxing Xi, and Gang Chen; however, these examples represent only a small fraction of those impacted. For a more comprehensive overview, please consult the full Impacted Persons list or the China Initiative webpage . Xiaoxing Xi 郗小星 Xiaoxing Xi was born and raised in China, graduating from Peking University with a BSc in physics in 1982 and later with a PhD in 1987. Following the completion of his education, Xi worked as a researcher in Germany before moving to the U.S. with his wife in 1989. Xi and his wife worked at Rutgers University and the University of Maryland, eventually settling in Pennsylvania. Xi’s wife works as a physics professor at Pennsylvania State University, while Xi became a professor at Temple University in 2009 and the chairman of Temple University’s physics department in 2014. In 2015, the Department of Justice accused Xi of illegally sending trade secrets to China, threatening him with 80 years in prison and $1 million in fines. Police raided Xi’s home and arrested him at gunpoint in front of his wife and two daughters. Xi later learned that agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation had been listening to his phone calls and reading his emails for months, possibly years. Some of the investigations against him had been authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, but many were completely warrantless and conducted under Section 702 of FISA and Executive Order 12333. Four months later, charges were dropped after Xi and his legal team proved that the government had failed to understand the science behind the accusations, but the damage was already done. Temple University suspended Xi from his position as chair of the Physics Department and forced him to take administrative leave, tarnishing his academic and professional reputation. In October 2019, Xi received the Andrei Sakharov Prize , w hich recognizes "outstanding leadership of scientists in upholding human rights." Baimadajie Angwang 昂旺 On September 21, 2020, Baimadajie Angwang, a New York Police Department (NYPD) officer, was arrested and charged with allegations of acting as an illegal agent of the People’s Republic of China, wire fraud, making false statements, and obstructing an official proceeding. He faced up to 55 years in prison and was considered a flight risk by the NYPD. Angwang was arrested at his home in Long Island in front of his wife and two-year old daughter. He spent six months in solitary confinement in Brooklyn before he was granted bail. On January 19, 2023, all charges against Angwang were abruptly dropped, but the NYPD has refused to reinstate him and has continued its internal investigation against him. A year later, New York Police Commissioner Edward Caban ordered the immediate firing of Angwang, choosing a harsher penalty than what was recommended by the NYPD disciplinary judge. Angwang moved to the U.S. as a teenager, enlisted in the Marines, and served in Afghanistan. He is a naturalized citizen. To this day, much of the evidence against him and the reason the charges were dropped remain classified, highlighting the covert nature of American intelligence surveillance and the disproportionate impact of warrantless surveillance on minority communities and immigrants. Gang Chen 陈刚 Born in Nanzhang, China, Gang Chen received an undergraduate and a bachelor's degree in engineering from the Huazhong University of Science and Technology, before pursuing a PhD in mechanical engineering from the University of California, Berkeley. After completion of his PhD, Chen worked at Duke University and the University of California, Los Angeles, before settling at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 2001. A year prior, he became a naturalized U.S. citizen. In January 2021, Chen was arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, charged with wire fraud, failing to file a foreign bank account report in some tax years, and making false statements on his tax returns. The indictment provoked strong criticism, inciting the “We Are All Gang Chen” campaign and a massive outcry from the MIT community. The Department of Justice dropped all criminal charges against him on January 20, 2022. Timeline of Events APA Justice has created a comprehensive, interactive timeline chronicling the history of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and relevant context. Access the timeline here . Below, this webpage lists a brief summary of the five sections included in the timeline. I. Pre-FISA Prior to the enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, concerns over government surveillance malpractice began to emerge, causing both legislators and the American public to pay more attention to national security and the protection of civil liberties. A decade before the enactment of FISA, the U.S. Supreme Court redefined the definition of a “search” or “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment in Katz v. U.S. Five years later, the Watergate scandal caused public outrage and increasing concerns of government abuse due to the burglaries and wiretapping that defined the crime. II. The Origin (1978–2007) This section describes the events following the initial enactment of FISA, including an executive order and the events of the case of Dr. Wen Ho Lee. Over two decades after the enactment of FISA, terrorists hijacked four airliners and crashed them into buildings, culminating in the deadliest terrorist attack in global history. Following 9/11, President Bush and the U.S. government enacted numerous stringent national security measures, including warrantless wiretapping of American citizens that was revealed by The New York Times . This controversy led Congress to seek a permanent statutory framework, culminating in the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. III. Codification and the Rise of "Incidental Collection" (2008–2017) In 2008, Congress enacted the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which included a new section, Section 702, that authorizes the targeting of non-U.S. citizens reasonably believed to be abroad. When the Amendments Act expired in 2012, Congress reauthorized it for another five years. In 2013, former NSA contractor Edward Snowden exposed the scope of U.S. mass surveillance under Section 702, further igniting public attention and discontent. Following the formation of APA Justice Task Force (APA Justice) in 2015, the Committee of 100 (C100), APA Justice, and a variety of civil rights groups contributed to and published a variety of letters and educational documents, drawing attention to racial or ethnic profiling of Asian Americans under FISA. IV. The China Initiative & Racial Profiling (2018–2023) In January 2018, Congress reauthorized Section 702 for six years, extending it until 2024. Eleven months later, the Department of Justice launched the China Initiative, a broad enforcement effort intended to counter alleged economic espionage and intellectual property theft linked to China. Over time, numerous cases under this initiative collapsed or were dismissed, revealing patterns of racial profiling, overreach, and insufficient evidence. V. Modern Reform and the 2026 Reauthorization (2024–Present) In April 2024, Congress again extended Section 702 for another two years, establishing the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act with a new expiration date of April 20, 2026. Since then, numerous analyses have been published, examining the potential future of the legislation. In May 2025, Federal Bureau of Investigation Director, Kash Patel, abruptly shut down the Office of Internal Auditing, a watchdog agency established in 2020 as a direct response to controversy surrounding the FBI’s use of Section 702. Additional References and Links American Civil Liberties Union: Warrantless Surveillance Under Section 702 of FISA American Civil Liberties Union: A Chinese American Scientist and His Family are Battling the FBI’s Profiling in Court DOJ Bureau of Justice Assistance: The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) Federation of American Scientists: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Ac t Congress.gov : https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF11451 The Hill: Massie, Gabbard Team up on Bill to Repeal the Patriot Act NBC News: After Being Wrongfully Accused of Spying for China, Professor Wins Appeal to Sue the Government Punchbowl News: Gabbard Reverses Course on Key Intel-gathering Tool as Nomination Teeters

Attempts to Revive China Initiative Return to The China Initiative or Racial Profiling Table of Contents 2022/03/17 Community Town Hall: The End of The "China Initiative" 2025/01/30 Senator Jim Risch: Every Chinese Student is An Agent of the CCP 2025/02/21 Reintroduction of Bills to Reinstate China Initiative 2025/03/12 Webinar: The China Initiative: Policy, Practice, and the Asian American Critique 2025/03/21 Webinar: Fighting Racial Profiling and The Criminalization of Academia in North America 2025/04/08 Visa Terminations, Trump Reversal, and New ICE Policy Continuing Developments 2022/03/17 Community Town Hall: The End of The "China Initiative" Although it was announced by the Department of Justice that the China Initiative ended on February 23, 2022, there have been continuing attempts to revive it. On March 17, 2022, a Community Town Hall was held to discuss the end of the China Initiative. The open forum was not recorded. APA Justice issued a statement that said in part: “Ending the “China Initiative” is a promising start to correct the harms caused by the initiative, apply lessons learned, and rebuild community trust and confidence that were lost in our law enforcement and judicial system. “But we emphasize that this is just a start. “We, like many other organizations and individuals, have broad concerns that the end of the initiative is just in name but does not reflect a change in fact and substance.” Return to Table of Contents 2025/01/30 Senator Jim Risch: Every Chinese Student is An Agent of the CCP During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on January 30, 2025, Committee Chair Senator Jim Risch made statement that “each [Chinese student], whether they like it or not, is an agent of the Chinese Communist Party.” References and Links 2025/01/31 Senate Foreign Relations Committee: Chairman Risch Questions Witnesses at Hearing on the Malign Influence of China Return to Table of Contents 2025/02/21 Reintroduction of Bills to Reinstate China Initiative On February 21, 2025, Senator Rick Scott announced the reintroduction of his Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act to reinstate and codify President Trump’s CCP Initiative under the Department of Justice (DOJ). On the same day, Rep. Lance Gooden reintroduced a companion bill in the House. References and Links 2025/02/21 Senator Rick Scott: Sen. Rick Scott Announces Bill to Reinstate President Trump’s CCP Initiative 2025/02/21 Rep. Lance Gooden: Congressman Lance Gooden Reintroduces Bipartisan Bill to Combat CCP Espionage and Protect U.S. Innovation 2023/03/07 Congress.gov : H.R.1398 - Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act of 2024 (118th Congress) Return to Table of Contents 2025/03/12 Webinar: The China Initiative: Policy, Practice, and the Asian American Critique On March 12, 2025, Michigan State University's Asian Pacific American Studies Program hosted a webinar on the China Initiative, a Trump administration program that targeted Asian American scholars and researchers for investigation and prosecution. The event was moderated by Dr. Kent Weaver of Michigan State University. Professor Lok Siu of UC Berkeley and Dr. Jeremy Wu of APA Justice were featured speakers. A Q&A session followed after their presentation. References and Links 2025/03/12 Lok Siu (UC Berkeley): The Racial Profiling of AAPIs: Stereotyping Threat 2025/03/12 Jeremy Wu (APA Justice): China Initiative: Past and Present 中国行动的前世今生 Return to Table of Contents 2025/03/21 Webinar: Fighting Racial Profiling and The Criminalization of Academia in North America On March 21, 2025, the Chinese Canadian Faculty Project at Simon Fraser University, Canada, invited Dr. Anming Hu for an event named Fighting Racial Profiling and the Criminalization of Academia in North America both in-person and online. This event was one of the Chinese Canadian Faculty Project’s ongoing series of Academic Freedom, Anti-racial profiling and Labour Rights. The series is sponsored by the Labour Studies Program and the Simon Fraser University Morgan Centre for Labour Research, Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) and Canada-China Focus (CCF). The purpose of the Chinese Canadian Faculty Project is to engage and support researchers, scholars, as well as graduate students of Chinese descent and other minority groups to fight against racial profiling and defend academic freedom in the increasingly restrictive national security measures adopted by the Canadian government through its Named Research Organizations in Sensitive Technology Research Areas, and legalized control of academic freedom under the newly passed Bill C-70, the Countering Foreign Interference Act. Through organizing open conversations, the Chinese Canadian Faculty Project hopes to foster an inclusive and open academic environment. On the event, Dr. Hu shared his powerful story as the first academic wrongfully charged and went on trial under the China Initiative. He spoke about what he experienced, the impacts on his academic career, his life and his family. He speaks out against racial profiling, raising awareness of the dangers of overreach in national security measures targeting academia. Immediate impact of the event : As a Chinese Canadian, Dr. Anming Hu’s story was known to the Chinese Canadian academic community. The event attracted attention nationwide in Canada. Scholars in sensitive technology areas have wide fear of racial profiling and being wrongfully treated by their own government. Therefore, university professors, scholars and students participated widely. There were more than seventy attendees across North America. The participants addressed their concerns during the panel discussion. They consulted Dr. Hu with legal concerns, and what they should do to protect themselves. Dr. Hu responded with his own experience. Political impact : Beyond attracting academia attention, the event has also drawn interest from politicians. Senator Yuen Pau Woo participated in-person. He was concerned about whether the Canadian government provided adequate support to Dr. Hu when he encountered injustice. He asked whether the Canadian government took any action to help Dr. Hu during his investigation and trial. Did any Canadian diplomats, government agencies or parliamentarians stand up to support him. In addition, he also asked if a Canadian citizen encountered similar legal problems in China, would the Canadian government provide similar advice and support. Dr. Hu responded how the Canadian government instructed him to “follow US law” and provided no help. In comparison, Dr. Hu addressed how US congresswomen and congressmen provided assistance in his case. He hopes that the Canadian government will be more proactive in protecting its citizens in the future, especially when handling similar legal issues, and can act more forcefully and effectively. Social impact : A local Vancouver social activist Ally Wang participated the event in-person. The Stop Anti-Asian Hate Crimes Advocacy Group, which she co-founded, helped promote the event. She writes articles for Chinese language media. She has translated Dr. Anming Hu’s story into Chinese and will publish on a Chinese language magazine. In conclusion, the event raised attention to racial profiling against Chinese professors in the academy in both Canada and America. It called wide attention to academic independence and impartiality, firmly oppose political interference, and encourage everyone to actively participate in discussions among universities, policymakers and the public to jointly promote the construction of an inclusive and fair higher education environment. 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 In Person: Room 7000, SFU Vancouver Harbor Centre Campus, 515 West Hastings Street Vancouver, BC V6B 5K3 Canada Webinar via Zoom HOST : Simon Fraser University, Labor Studies Program Moderator : Dr. Xinying Hu , Simon Fraser University Speaker : Dr. Anming Hu , University of Tennessee, Knoxville Discussants: Dr. Jane Wang , University of British Columbia Dr. Jie Yang , Simon Fraser University Return to Table of Contents The Case of Professor Xiaofeng Wang 王晓峰 Professor Xiaofeng Wang Xiaofeng Wang, a prominent cybersecurity professor at Indiana University Bloomington (IUB), was terminated on March 28, 2025—the same day FBI and Department of Homeland Security agents conducted searches at his homes in Bloomington and Carmel, Indiana. The university has not publicly disclosed the reasons for his dismissal. Professor Wang's wife, Nianli Ma—a systems analyst at the university—was also terminated on March 24, 2025. References and Links APA Justice Impacted Person: Xiaofeng Wang Return to Table of Contents 2025/04/08 Visa Terminations, Trump Reversal, and New ICE Policy Inside Higher Ed Tracker as of 2025/04/25 On January 29, 2025, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14188, which authorized the revocation of international student visas, targeting students involved in anti-Israel protests or those alleged to have violated laws during such demonstrations, particularly following the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel. Revocation of student visas began to spread beyond the executive order as part of Trump's crackdown on immigration in early April 2025. On April 8, 2025, Inside Higher Ed began to track the revocation of F-1 or J-1 student status. As of April 25, 2025, over 280 colleges and universities have identified more than 1,800 international students and recent graduates who have had their legal status changed by the State Department. More than 100 lawsuits and dozens of restraining orders from federal judges challenged the Trump administration’s mass termination of student visa records. After 20 days of consistent legal defeats, the administration capitulated and reversed its decision on April 25, 2025. Notable lawsuits include Chen v. Noem (3:25-cv-03292) , filed April 11 in the Northern District of California by the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (华美维权同盟 CALDA) Jane Doe 1 v. Bondi (1:25-cv-01998) , filed April 11 in the Northern District of Georgia by CAIR-Georgia, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta, and American Civil Liberties Union-Georgia. On April 29, Politico reported that the visa revocations were part of the "Student Criminal Alien Initiative," which involved running 1.3 million student names through a federal criminal database run by the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC). Approximately 6,400 matches were found, many of which were minor infractions or dismissed charges. Despite this, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) used the data to terminate student records in the SEVIS tracking system. In parallel, the State Department revoked visas for roughly 3,000 individuals based on similar data, separate from the SEVIS terminations. Hundreds of the terminations, an ICE official who helped oversee the effort said, came less than 24 hours after an April 1 email exchange between his office and the State Department, with little sign of review of individual cases to ensure the decisions were accurate. The lack of due process became especially clear during an April 29 hearing on the case of Patel v. Lyons (1:25-cv-01096) before U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, where ICE officials admitted that hundreds of terminations were made within 24 hours of receiving raw data—with little or no individual case review. “When the courts say due process is important, we’re not unhinged, we’re not radicals,” Judge Reyes said during an hourlong hearing. “I’m not on a lark questioning why students who have been here legally, who paid to be in this country by paying their universities … they’re cut off with less than 24 hours of consideration and no notice whatsoever." Akshar Patel brought the suit that led to the April 29 hearing. He is an international student from India who pursued undergraduate studies in computer science at the University of Texas at Arlington. He graduated prior to 2025 and has since been working in the computer science field in North Texas. HIs legal status in the U.S. was abruptly terminated after his name appeared in the ICE sweep of the NCIC database. He had faced a reckless driving charge in 2018 but it was ultimately dismissed. When colleges discovered the students no longer had legal status, it prompted chaos and confusion. In the past, legal statuses typically were updated after colleges told the government the students were no longer studying at the school. In some cases this spring, colleges told students to stop working or taking classes immediately and warned them they could be deported after the ICE sweep. According to AP News , NBC News , and multiple media reports on April 29, an internal memo to all Student and Exchange Visitor Program personnel, which falls under ICE, shows an expanded list of criteria for ICE to terminate foreign-born students’ legal status in the U.S., including a “U.S. Department of State Visa Revocation (Effective Immediately).” It was filed in court by the Justice Department on April 28 and dated April 26. Brad Banias , an immigration attorney who represents Patel, said the new guidelines vastly expand ICE’s authority beyond previous policy, which did not count visa revocation as grounds for losing legal status. In the past, if a student had their visa revoked, they could stay in the U.S. to finish their studies — they simply would not be able to reenter if they left the country. “This just gave them carte blanche to have the State Department revoke a visa and then deport those students even if they’ve done nothing wrong,” Banias said. On April 11, 2025, the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance 华美维权同盟 (CALDA) filed a lawsuit Chen v. Noem (3:25-cv-03292) on behalf of four Chinese students enrolled at UC Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, University of Cincinnati, and Columbia. References and Links Inside Higher Ed: International Student Visas Revoked CourtListener: Patel v. Lyons (1:25-cv-01096) CourtListener: Chen v. Noem (3:25-cv-03292) CourtListener: Jane Doe 1 v. Bondi (1:25-cv-01998) 2025/04/29 AP News: The US government has a new policy for terminating international students’ legal status 2025/04/29 NBC News: Visa revocations can now lead to legal status terminations, according to internal memo 2025/04/29 Politico: Feds reveal how immigration squad targeted thousands of foreign students 2025/04/25 Politico: Trump administration reverses abrupt terminations of foreign students’ US visa registrations 2025/04/22 AsAmNews: Indian and Chinese nationals top list of student visa revocations 2025/04/17 AILA: Policy Brief: The Scope of Immigration Enforcement Actions Against International Students 2025/01/29 Executive Order 14188—Additional Measures To Combat Anti-Semitism Return to Table of Contents Continuing Developments Reference and Links 2025/04/16 US-China Perception Monitor: Fears of a China Initiative Revival Stir Anxiety Among Chinese American Academics Return to Table of Contents

The House of Representatives has passed H.Res. 908, a resolution condemning all forms of anti-Asian bigotry as related to COVID-19. September 17, 2020 On September 17, 2020, the House of Representatives passed H.Res. 908, a resolution condemning all forms of anti-Asian bigotry as related to COVID-19. The resolution, introduced by CAPAC First Vice Chair Rep. Grace Meng, is a response to the over 2,600 reported anti-Asian hate crimes and incidents in recent months which have been driven by misperceptions about the coronavirus and how it spreads. The resolution reads as follows: (1) calls on all public officials to condemn and denounce any and all anti-Asian sentiment in any form; (2) recognizes that the health and safety of all Americans, no matter their background, must be of utmost priority; (3) condemns all manifestations of expressions of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, anti-Asian sentiment, scapegoating, and ethnic or religious intolerance; (4) calls on Federal law enforcement officials, working with State and local officials-- (A) to expeditiously investigate and document all credible reports of hate crimes and incidents and threats against the Asian-American community in the United States; (B) to collect data to document the rise of incidences of hate crimes due to COVID–19; and (C) to hold the perpetrators of those crimes, incidents, or threats accountable and bring such perpetrators to justice; and (5) recommits United States leadership in building more inclusive, diverse, and tolerant societies-- (A) to prioritize language access and inclusivity in communication practices; and (B) to combat misinformation and discrimination that put Asian Americans at risk. The House of Representatives has passed H.Res. 908, a resolution condemning all forms of anti-Asian bigotry as related to COVID-19. Previous Next House Resolution Condemns All Forms of Anti-Asian Sentiment Related to COVID-19

China Initiative Webinars China Initiative Webinar Series #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative”