Franklin Tao 陶丰 Docket ID: 2:19-cr-20052 District Court, D. Kansas Date filed: Aug 21, 2019 Date ended: January 18, 2023 10th Circuit Appeals Court Appellate Case 23-3013 Acquittal: July 11th, 2024 Table of Contents Overview 2019/08/21 Indictment and Pre-trial Motions 2022/03/21 Jury Trial to Start After Several Delays 2022/03/21 Jury Trial Lasted 17 Days 2022/09/20 Convictions Reversed 2023/01/18 Sentencing 2024/07/11 Appeal Victory 2025/01/03 Tao v. University of Kansas Community Engagement and Support Photo Album Overview On August 21, 2019, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the indictment of Professor Feng “Franklin” Tao (陶丰), a professor at Kansas University for failing to disclose conflict of interest with Fuzhou University in China. Professor Tao was the first academic scientist indicted under the China Initiative. Professor Tao was born in China and moved to the U.S. in 2002. He earned his doctorate’s degree from Princeton University and worked at the University of California-Berkeley and Notre Dame before August 2014, when he was hired as a tenured associate professor at the University of Kansas’ Center for Environmentally Beneficial Catalysis. The center conducts research on sustainable technology to conserve natural resources and energy. The jury trial was delayed several times. The government added the second superseding indictments on June 24, 2020, bringing the total to 10 counts of wire fraud and making false statements. In full support of Professor Tao, the community submitted amicus briefs, organized rallies, and raised legal defense funds. A jury trial started on March 21, 2022. Professor Tao was found guilty on three wire-fraud counts and one false-statement count but acquitted him on four other counts. On September 20, 2022, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Julie Robinson reversed the three counts of wire fraud convictions and acquitted Professor Tao. On January 18, 2023, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Julie Robinson handed down the lightest possible sentence on the last conviction of making false statement against Professor Franklin Tao with no jail time, no fine, and 2 years of probation. Professor Tao appealed. On September 21, 2023, the 10th Circuit Appeals Court held a hearing in Denver, Colorado, on Professor Tao’s appeal to overturn the lone conviction. On July 11, 2024, the Appeals Court on a 2-1 vote ruled that prosecutors offered insufficient evidence at trial to support the sole remaining count on which jurors convicted Professor Tao in 2022. Professor Tao was acquitted of the last charge, bringing an end to his five-year ordeal of criminal persecution. [jump to menu] 2019/08/21 Indictment and Pre-trial Motions On August 21, 2019, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the indictment of Professor Feng “Franklin” Tao (陶丰), a professor at Kansas University (KU) for failing to disclose conflict of interest with Fuzhou University in China. He was charged for four counts of program and wire fraud. Professor Tao has been an associate professor and researcher at the Center for Environmentally Beneficial Catalysis (CEBC) since August 2014. He was conducting research under two Department of Energy (DOE) contracts and four National Science Foundation (NSF) contracts. If convicted, Professor Tao faced up to 20 years in federal prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on the wire fraud count, and up to 10 years and a fine up to $250,000 on each of the three program fraud counts. On November 17, attorneys for Professor Tao filed a motion to dismiss the case. It revealed that the government’s investigation into Dr. Tao grew out of fabricated allegations by a disgruntled, unpaid visiting scholar at KU, who, after failing to extort Dr. Tao for $300,000, later admitted to the FBI that she hacked into Dr. Tao’s email account to fish for “evidence” she could provide to the FBI and then, using phony aliases, fabricated complaints to both KU and the FBI regarding Dr. Tao. The motion stated that Dr. Tao never accepted a teaching position in China and, therefore, he had no obligation to make any disclosure to KU. Dr. Tao’s Conflict of Interest form was completely accurate when he represented that he had no conflict that would interfere with his teaching responsibilities at KU, and it would have been false had he certified otherwise. Five additional arguments were provided to support the motion to dismiss. On January 6, 2020, the federal judge delayed ruling on the motion to dismiss. Government attorneys said they planned to file a superseding indictment. On January 15, 2020, Government attorneys filed the first superseding indictment of two counts of wire fraud and one count of program fraud. On June 24, 2020, Government attorneys filed the second superseding indictment of seven counts of wire fraud and three counts of false statement. On August 14, 2020, attorneys for Professor Tao filed two motions with attachments to dismiss the second superseding indictment, arguing that the government seeks to use Tao’s prosecution as a potential new model for DOJ to prosecute professors “without having to produce evidence of intellectual property theft or export control violations.” The prosecution of Dr. Tao ensnared in a U.S. government crackdown on Chinese economic espionage and trade secret theft opens the door to criminalizing workplace disagreements. The motion takes aim at the broader China Initiative announced by DOJ in 2018 to counter the threat of Chinese espionage and intellectual property theft, including on American college campuses. Since then, federal prosecutors have charged Chinese academics across the country of failing to disclose foreign sources of funding and lying about their links to China. “The Department of Justice is not the Ministry of Truth, and it lacks authority to regulate routine, private miscommunications between employees and employers regarding employee activities,” the motion says. “If the Court permits this Indictment to proceed to trial, it would open the floodgates to a vast range of federal prosecutions for garden-variety employment disputes that otherwise would have, at most, subjected the employee to administrative discipline at work,” they added. “This government overreach would not be limited to university professors.” On August 20, 2020, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC and Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus filed an amicus brief in support of Professor Tao and opposes the government’s increased efforts to target and racially profile Asian American scientists and researchers. The amicus brief addresses the government’s broad campaign to scrutinize and target Chinese American scientists and researchers and discusses how the government’s xenophobic and overzealous prosecutions does real harm to the individual lives of Chinese and Asian Americans and immigrant communities. The government has been mounting a broad campaign scrutinizing and targeting Chinese American scientists and researchers through the China Initiative. Fueled by xenophobia, the China Initiative was adopted by the Department of Justice in 2018 for the purported purpose of combating economic espionage. The China Initiative is part of the latest wave of xenophobia against Chinese and Asian Americans and follows a long history of Asian Americans and immigrants being criminalized, stereotyped as “perpetual foreigners,” scapegoated, and profiled as spies disloyal to the United States. On November 2, 2020, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Julie Robinson denied the motion to dismiss the Second Superseding indictment. On November 28, 2020, a GoFundMe campaign was started to raise legal defense funds for Professor Tao. References and Links 2020/11/28 GoFundMe: Legal Defense Fund for Franklin Tao 2020/11/02 AP: Judge refuses to dismiss charges against Kansas researcher 2020/11/02 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 99) Memorandum and Order 2020/08/21 Chemical & Engineering News: University of Kansas chemist Feng ‘Franklin’ Tao’s attorneys move to dismiss charges for fraud and false statements 2020/08/21世界日报: 亞裔民權機構：未披露與中國大學關係不算商業間諜 2020/08/21 AsAmNews: Amicus Brief from Asian American Civil Rights Groups Alleges Federal Government Racially Profiles Asian American Researchers, Scientists 2020/08/20 Advancing Justice | AAJC: United States v. Tao Amicus Brief 2020/08/14 AP: Filing: Kansas prof’s prosecution criminalizes job disputes 2020/08/14 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 83) Memorandum of Dr. Franklin Tao in Support of His Motion to Dismiss The Second Superseding Indictment Due to The Government’s False, Misleading, and Prejudicial Statements to The Grand Jury 2020/08/14 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 82) Memorandum of Dr. Franklin Tao in support of His Motion to Dismiss The Second Superseding Indictment for Failure to State an Offense and Lack of Venue 2020/07/02 Chemical & Engineering News: Revised charges filed against University of Kansas chemist Feng ‘Franklin’ Tao 2020/06/24 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 75) Second Superseding Indictment 2020/01/24 Chemical & Engineering News: New charges filed against University of Kansas chemist Feng “Franklin” Tao 2020/01/15 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 50) Superseding Indictment 2020/01/06 AP: Judge mulls fate of US researcher who denies Chinese work 2019/11/20 Washington Post: Accused of fraud, Kansas researcher denies working for a Chinese university as he fights federal charge 2019/11/18 AP: Kansas researcher denies working for Chinese university 2019/11/17 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 30) Motion to Dismiss The Indictment 2019/11/17 Wall Street Journal: U.S. Struggles to Stem Chinese Efforts to Recruit Scientists 2019/09/18 Law360: Professor’s Case Draws Hard Line On Foreign Conflicts 2019/08/22 Financial Times中文网: US indicts Chinese professor over alleged lack of disclosure 2019/08/21 Reuters: U.S. charges Kansas researcher over ties to Chinese university 2019/08/21 KMBC9 News: KU researcher charged with failing to disclose conflict of interest with Chinese university 2019/08/21 Bloomberg: U.S. Says Scientist Hid Job in China. Web Search Tells Otherwise 2019/08/21 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 1) Sealed Indictment 2019/08/21 Department of Justice: University of Kansas Researcher Indicted for Fraud for Failing to Disclose Conflict of Interest with Chinese University [jump to menu] 2022/03/21 Jury Trial to Start After Several Delays On August 21, 2021, attorneys for Professor Tao motioned for a hearing and to suppress evidence resulting from two unlawful search warrants obtained using false and misleading affidavits. According to a Washington Post on August 24, 2021, FBI agent Stephen Lampe knowingly used false information from an informant to obtain warrants to search Tao’s emails, computers, home and office. The motion says Lampe deliberately withheld information that would undercut the informant’s credibility and the reliability of the evidence. On September 9, 2021, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Julie Robinson struck down the defense’s motion and set a trial date of October 25, 2021. On October 21, 2021, the jury trial set for October 25, 2021, was canceled. On November 23, 2021, attorneys for Professor Tao filed an opposition to the Government’s motion for Rule 15 depositions and objection to continued trial date. The Court has granted the government’s motion to continue the October 25, 2021 trial date, then December 6, 2021, and subsequently to April 18, 2022. On December 20, 2021, Judge Robinson reset the trial date to March 21, 2022. On January 27, 2022, Judge Robinson excluded expert testimony in the upcoming trial of Professor Tao on the grounds it risks fanning anti-Chinese sentiment, The expert witness in question was Dr. Glenn Tiffert. While Judge Robinson agreed Dr. Tiffert's testimony might be relevant and helpful, she said any testimony about the Chinese government’s efforts to acquire foreign technology to further its industrial policy objectives “risks misleading the jury into thinking this case is actually an economic espionage or theft of trade secrets case.” “But this is not an espionage prosecution,” Judge Robinson continued, “and the Government may not color the trial with national security overtones. This testimony also poses a significant risk of stoking Sinophobia, especially given that Defendant, who is Chinese, faces trial amid increasing reports of anti-Asian discrimination and violence since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic — and evoking exactly the kind of negative emotional response that might ‘lure the [jury] into declaring guilt on a ground different from proof specific to the offense charged.’” On February 7, 2022, the Government motioned to dismiss one count of wire fraud and one count of false statement from the Second Superseding Indictment, leaving a total of eight counts. The motion was unopposed. References and Links 2022/02/07 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 219) Government’s Motion to Dismiss Counts Three and Eight of The Second Superseding Indictment (Doc. 75) 2022/01/28 KCUR/NPR: Judge deals blow to government’s case against KU professor accused of concealing Chinese ties 2022/01/27 Politico: Judge limits testimony at trial of professor accused of hiding Chinese ties 2022/01/27 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 215) Memorandum & Order 2021/11/23 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 199) Dr. Franklin Tao’s [Redacted] Opposition to The Government’s Motion for Rule 15 Depositions and Objection to Continued Trial Date. 2021/10/21 Mother Jones: Has the DOJ’s Campaign to Root Out Chinese Spies on College Campuses Gone Too Far? 2019/09/09 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc.145) Trial Order 2019/09/09 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 144) Order Striking Notice of Clarification 2021/08/24 Washington Post: Kansas professor says FBI misled court in alleging hidden ties to Chinese government 2019/08/21 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc.127) Motion for Franks Hearing and To Suppress Evidence Resulting from Two Unlawful Search Warrants Obtained Using False and Misleading Affidavits 2021/08/15 侨报网: 又一被控华裔教授叫屈！陶丰律师指FBI误导法官 2021/01/28 《美南日报》: 陶峰教授即將與司法部對簿公堂 2021/01/22 United Chinese Americans: 陶峰即将与司法部对簿公堂 [jump to menu] 2022/03/21 Jury Trial Lasted 17 Days Although the Department of Justice (DOJ) ended the China Initiative in February 2022, it did not end the prosecution of Professor Tao, the first academic indicted under the initiative. It highlighted how problematic and damaging the China Initiative was. Professor Tao was not going on trial for spying or handing sensitive information to China. He was charged with fraud and making false statements - essentially, failure to disclose affiliations with a Chinese university and a government-run talent program. The trial was held at the Robert J. Dole Courthouse in Kansas City, Kansas. Defense lawyer Peter Zeidenberg said during his opening statement that the defense team would focus on what they said was a rush to prosecution without a deeper look at the evidence. He mentioned a former graduate student of Professor Tao’s who allegedly took revenge for a perceived slight by submitting a false report under assumed identities claiming that Professor Tao was a tech spy. Professor Tao was charged with six counts of wire fraud and two counts of making false statements, not espionage. The judge limited mention of the China Initiative in the trial. There were still some media reports that produced misleading headlines and contents, including the Kansas Public Radio. On April 5, 2022, lawyers made their final arguments, and the jurors began deliberations the next day. In closing arguments recapping more than two weeks of testimony, lawyers drilled down on points they have made since the beginning of the case. Prosecutors reviewed a long list of emails, recorded phone conversations and other evidence, saying Tao sought to hide a full-time research job with Fuzhou University that should have been disclosed to the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy, the granting agencies, as well as to KU. One of Tao’s defense attorneys, Peter Zeidenberg, argued that the government had fallen far short of proof beyond reasonable doubt. “In almost three years of investigation, two weeks of evidence, twenty-eight government witnesses and hundreds and hundreds of exhibits and not one word about loss.” Grants go directly to the university and not to professors, a fact Zeidenberg said FBI investigators failed to learn. “The government wants you to believe Dr. Tao lied and cheated,” he said, noting the money benefited KU.“ Then he worked sixteen hours a day on those grants. What kind of a fraud scheme is that?” Zeidenberg said the government failed to show any false statements were made to granting agencies and that in fact the grants applications were submitted before the job at Fuzhou was offered. Tao was not required to report pending grants, he said. Moreover, the Fuzhou affiliation was listed publicly on progress reports on three of Tao’s papers, he said. Zeidenberg also faulted the FBI investigation that led to Tao’s arrest. The agency took the word of a woman who accused Tao of being a tech spy after trying to extort him, he said. “They pinned their ears back and put their blinders on and focused on getting Dr. Tao,” rather than doing basic research about how the grant process works, Zeidenberg said. “The government is apparently unwilling or unable to acknowledge or admit they made a huge mistake here.” On April 7, 2022, the jury found Professor Tao guilty of four of the eight counts against him – three counts of wire fraud and one count of making a false statement. References and Links 2022/04/22 JDSupra: After Researcher's Conviction on Some Counts, Attorney Chides Universities, Sees 'No Harm' 2022/04/14 Science: Why a judge might overturn a guilty verdict against a U.S. scientist for hiding China ties 2022/04/13 New Yorker: An Uncertain Future for a Chinese Scientist Accused of Espionage 2022/04/11 Inside Higher Ed: A Verdict, but No Clear Victory, for the China Initiative 2022/04/08 Nature: Jury finds University of Kansas chemical engineer guilty of hiding ties to China 2022/04/07 KMBC: Federal jury convicts KU professor Feng “Franklin” Tao on four counts of wire fraud 2022/04/07 Law360: Prof. Convicted Over China Ties But Judge To Review Verdict 2022/04/07 Reuters: University of Kansas professor convicted of concealing China ties 2022/04/07 C&EN: Breaking: University of Kansas chemist Feng “Franklin” Tao found guilty over China interactions 2022/04/07 KCUR/NPR: University of Kansas professor charged under Trump-era initiative convicted of wire fraud 2022/04/07 Science: Kansas chemistry professor found guilty of hiding ties to China 2022/04/07 NPR: A jury finds a Kansas scholar guilty of fraud and hiding ties to China 2022/04/06 C&EN: Daily updates: Trial continues for University of Kansas chemist Feng “Franklin” Tao over China interactions 2022/04/05 KCUR/NPR: Case of University of Kansas professor accused of concealing China ties goes to the jury 2022/04/05 Law360: Kansas Professor Says FBI Cut Corners In China Ties Case 2022/04/04 AP: Kansas researcher to mount defense over China ties at trial 2022/04/02 KCUR/NPR: Defense will put on its case in closely watched trial of KU professor accused of wire fraud 2022/04/01 UCA|北美新视界: 陶丰教授首周庭审结束，检方证人无法拿出不利证据 2022/03/22 KCUR/NPR: Prosecutors accuse KU professor of leading 'double life' in trial over concealing China ties 2022/03/22 AP: Kansas researcher accused of secret China work goes to trial 2022/03/22 北美新视界: 陶丰教授庭审首日选出陪审团 2022/03/21 NPR: Arrested under a Trump-era China initiative, Franklin Tao heads to trial 2022/03/21 C&EN: Trial starts for University of Kansas chemist Feng “Franklin” Tao over China interactions 2022/03/21 Nature: High-profile trial begins for chemical engineer accused of hiding China ties 2022/03/21 Inquirer.net: Anti-Asian xenophobia – the next wave 2022/03/21 WMBC: Federal trial begins for KU professor accused of lying to university 2022/03/21 Kansas Reflector: KU professor accused of fraud under China Initiative goes to criminal trial 2022/03/14 New Yorker: Have Chinese Spies Infiltrated American Campuses? 2022/09/20 Convictions Reversed On September 20, 2022, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Julie Robinson ruled on the defense motion filed in April 2022 for judgment of acquittal and alternative motion for a new trial. Judge Robinson reversed the conviction of three wire fraud charges against Professor Tao. She sustained the conviction of one count of making a false statement and denied the motion for a new trial. Judge Robinson said in her ruling, “Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, the Court finds that the evidence was legally and factually insufficient to support Tao’s wire fraud convictions. Though Tao was deceptive in not disclosing his activities at FZU, there was no evidence that Tao obtained money or property through the alleged scheme to defraud, as required under the wire fraud statute. During the time period of the alleged scheme to defraud, Tao continued to rightfully receive his salary from KU for his services and continued to successfully perform the research required by DOE and NSF under their research grants. But there was sufficient evidence supporting the jury’s guilty verdict on the false statement count. Tao made a false statement in certifying to the truth and completeness of the September 2018 Institutional Responsibilities form he submitted to KU. Further, there is no basis for a new trial on the false statement count.” On September 22, 2022, sentencing for the false statement conviction was set for January 18, 2023. On October 19, 2022, the Government appealed to the 10th Circuit Appeals Court granting the acquittal of three counts of wire fraud. On November 28, 2022, the Government motioned for voluntary dismissal of its appeal. It was granted unopposed. References and Links 2022/11/28 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 315) Order to Dismiss the Government's Appeal 2022/10/19 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 309) Government’s Notice of Appeal 2022/09/29 The National Law Journal: The China Initiative May Have Finally Died—Killed Not by DOJ but the Courts 2022/09/22 Nature: Convictions reversed for US chemical engineer accused of hiding China ties 2022/09/20 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 307) Judgment of Acquittal 2022/09/20 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 306) Memorandum and Order 2022/04/21 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 286) Dr. Franklin Tao’s Renewed Motion for Judgment of Acquittal and Alternative Motion for a New Trial 2023/01/18 Sentencing On January 18, 2023, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Julie Robinson sentenced Professor Tao to time served and two years of probation for the lone conviction of making a false statement. She did not impose a fine. Prosecutors had sought a prison sentence of two and a half years. In announcing the sentence, Judge Robinson said prosecutors had presented no evidence during the trial that Professor Tao received any money for his work in China, which is required for a wire fraud conviction. She said when the trial started, she expected to hear evidence that Professor Tao’s deceptions caused financial loss and that he shared important research with Chinese officials at the expense of U.S. taxpayers and the three institutions. Rather, the evidence showed that Professor Tao continued fulfilling his duties to the University of Kansas while in China by working 70-hour weeks and pushing his students at Kansas to do the same. And she noted he was doing fundamental research that is freely shared across the scientific community. “This is not an espionage case ... If it was, they presented absolutely no evidence that was going on,” Judge Robinson said. “Believe me, if that was what was going on, it would have been a much different sentence today.” Professor Tao’s attorney, Peter Zeidenberg, said he will appeal Tao’s remaining conviction. Professor Tao served a week in prison after his arrest in 2018 and has worn an electronic monitoring while having his travel restricted since then. His attorneys said the case destroyed his reputation, his family’s financial stability and his distinguished career. References and Links 2023/01/20 Inside Higher Ed: Probation, Not Prison, for Researcher in China Initiative Case 2023/01/19 Yahoo News: Judge rules no jail time for University of Kansas researcher accused of secret China work 2023/01/19 Nature: US chemical engineer avoids prison after conviction for hiding ties to China 2023/01/18 Science: No jail time for Kansas professor convicted for undisclosed research ties to China 2023/01/19 VOA: Former Researcher Avoids Prison in China-Related Probe From Trump Era 2023/01/18 Reuters: Kansas researcher avoids prison in blow to Trump-era China-related probe 2023/01/18 AP News: Kansas researcher given time served in China-related case 2023/01/18 C&EN: Chemist Feng “Franklin” Tao sentenced to time served 2024/07/11 Appeal Victory On July 11, 2024, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver overturned the lone conviction of Professor Tao for making a false statement related to work he was doing in China. The Appeals Court ruled in a 2-to-1 decision, “We reverse his conviction … and agree with Tao that the government offered insufficient evidence for a rational jury to find that his statement to his employer was material to any DOE or NSF decision” affecting the status of his grants. U.S. Circuit Judge Nancy Moritz wrote for the majority. Professor Tao said in a statement issued by United Chinese Americans (UCA) after the appeal victory, "Today, I come to you with a mix of heavy and joyous feelings to update you on the outcome of our four-year struggle. The Tenth Circuit Court has removed the last remaining charge against me. These four years of fighting against ten baseless charges have been an unimaginable battle. Without the just legal assistance of our lawyers, Peter Zeidenberg and Mike Dearington, I could not have achieved today's victory. "I want to express my gratitude to our Chinese and Asian communities (including UCA, AAJC, Committee 100, APA Justice, Asian American Scholar Forum, CALDA, AFI, OCAA...) and the many Chinese friends who supported me. I am especially thankful for UCA's continued support and encouragement over these years. Special thanks go to UCA President Haipei Shue and his team for their tremendous support. Without President Shue's personal encouragement and support, we could not have fought to this day!" 各位华人朋友们， 今天我怀着极其沉重而高兴的心情来向你们更新这四年以来奋力抗争的结果。今天第十巡回法庭将最后一个强加在我身上的最后一个罪状去掉了。这四年来，对这十个毫无根据的罪状的抗争是一场令人难以想象的斗争。没有我们的律师Peter Zeidenberg and Mike Dearington 正义的法律援助， 我不可能得到今天的胜利。我要感谢，我们华人和亚裔团体（包括UCA, AAJC, Committee 100, APA Justice, Asian American Scholar Forum, CALDA, AFI, OCAA….）和众多华人朋友的支持。我要感谢UCA对我在这几年的持续支持和鼓励。我特别感谢UCA薛海培会长及其团队的鼎力支持。没有薛会长亲力亲为的鼓励和支持，我们不可能抗争到到今天！ 陶丰 References and Links 2024/08/13 South China Morning Post: Why the spectre of another Trump term haunts China-born scientists in the US 2024/08/07 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 356) Amended Judgment of Acquittal 2024/07/22 Chemistry World: Chinese-born chemist cleared of last conviction under US’s espionage probe 2024/07/17 AsAmNews: Court overturns Dr. Feng ‘Franklin’ Tao’s conviction under China initiative 2024/07/13 AP: Court voids last conviction of Kansas researcher in case that started as Chinese espionage probe 2024/07/12 星岛环球网: “中国计划”首位被起诉华人学者，堪萨斯大学副教授陶丰上诉得直 2024/07/12 世界新聞網: 缠讼4年 中国行动计划首位起诉教授陶丰 10控罪全撤销 2024/07/12 Science: Court exonerates Kansas professor in China research fraud case 2024/07/12 Kansas Reflector: Federal appellate court tosses final conviction in case against former tenured Kansas professor 2024/07/11 俄州亚太联盟: 罪名被推翻，陶峰教授赢了！ 2024/07/11 美國華人聯盟 UCA: 快讯 | 华裔学者陶丰胜诉，联邦上诉法院推翻定罪 2024/07/11 Reuters: Kansas researcher wins reversal of conviction in Trump-era China probe 2022/02/14 USA v Tao 2:19-cr-20052: (Doc. 222) Order [jump to menu] 2025/01/03 Tao v. University of Kansas (2:25-cv-02005) On January 3, 2025, Profssor Tao filed a civil rights employment discrimination lawsuit titled Tao v. University of Kansas (Case No. 2:25-cv-02005) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. References and Links CourtListener: Tao v. University of Kansas (2:25-cv-02005) 2025/03/02 New York Times: Professor, Scrutinized for Ties to China, Sues to Get His Job Back Community Engagement and Support The communities were mobilized and engaged from the first day of Professor Tao’s indictment. On August 21, 2019, the day of DOJ’s indictment, Bloomberg conducted a web search and published the first media report on Professor Tao’s case by fact-checking some of the allegations of the indictment. On September 9, 2019, APA Justice convened a regular conference call (those were days before the use of Zoom) to inform concerned individuals and organizations about the indictment of Professor Tao. On August 20, 2020, Advancing Justice | AAJC and Advancing Justice | ALC filed an amicus brief in United States v. Feng "Franklin" Tao, providing significant evidence of racial profiling against Asian American and immigrant scientists and researchers. On November 28, 2020, a GoFundMe campaign was set up for a legal defense fund for Professor Tao. Almost 6,000 donations have been made so far. When the jury trial date was set to start on December 6, 2021, a turnout campaign was being organized to support Professor Tao in Kansas City, Kansas On January 18, 2023, supporters of Professor Tao gathered in the cold wind and rain outside the Robert J. Dole Federal Courthouse as he was sentenced for the lone conviction of making a false statement. On September 21, 2023, over 30 community members came from across the country to show their support for Professor Tao by attending the hearing to overturn the lone conviction, which was held by the 10th Circuit Appeals Court in Denver, Colorado. References and Links 2024/07/24 South China Morning Post: Chinese-born scientist in US tells of ‘fear and desperation’ from Trump-era convictions 2024/07/17 Asian American Scholar Forum: AASF Celebrates Dr. Franklin Tao’s Appeal Victory 2024/07/17 Advancing Justice | AAJC: Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC Commends Decision Overturning Conviction of Dr. Feng “Franklin” Tao Under the ‘China Initiative’ 2023/09/20 Asian American Scholar Forum: Important Reminder, New Time & Virtual Option Available for Dr. Tao's Appeal 2023/01/18 Kansas Reflector: Advocates gather to support former University of Kansas professor following his sentencing 2022/03/20 俄州亚太联盟: 紧急呼吁声援陶丰教授赢得司法公正，周一开庭 2022/03/19 北美新视界: 开庭在即 紧急呼吁声援陶教授赢得司法公正 2022/03/16 Asian and Asian-American Faculty & Staff Council at University of Kansas: Statement on Franklin Tao's Trial 2022/03/04 CALDA: CALDA捐款声援陶丰教授，众人合力再战美国政府！ 2022/03/03 UCA: 陶丰负债累累即将开庭 陈刚挺身而出呼吁募捐 2021/08/15 侨报网: 又一被控华裔教授叫屈！陶丰律师指FBI误导法官 2021/01/28 《美南日报》: 陶峰教授即將與司法部對簿公堂 2021/01/22 United Chinese Americans: 陶峰即将与司法部对簿公堂 2020/11/28 GoFundMe: Legal Defense Fund for Franklin Tao 2020/08/21世界日报: 亞裔民權機構：未披露與中國大學關係不算商業間諜 2020/08/20 Advancing Justice | AAJC: United States v. Tao Amicus Brief 2019/08/21 Bloomberg: U.S. Says Scientist Hid Job in China. Web Search Tells Otherwise https://asamnews.com/2024/07/17/feng-franklin-tao-university-professor-kansas-overturned-conviction/ www.stnn.cc “中国计划”首位被起诉华人学者，堪萨斯大学副教授陶丰上诉得直 | 星岛环球网 美国上诉法庭第十巡回庭昨就堪萨斯大学副教授陶丰“虚假陈述”陪审团定罪的上诉进行裁决，认为此项罪名不成立，判地区法院取消这项罪名。 https://bit.ly/46Rf5es Previous Item Next Item

2020 was an unprecedented year that saw our nation increasingly divided and filled with anti-Asian hate. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. December 27, 2020 The year 2020 was one of unprecedented challenges that saw our nation increasingly divided, unable to control the COVID-19 pandemic that was filled with anti-Asian hate and continuing profiling of hundreds if not thousands of Chinese American scientists under investigations and prosecutions. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. On December 27, 2020, a virtual event was held with Professor Steven Pei as the host to conclude a successful GoFundMe campaign , which was reported by the World Journal under the headline 员工勇救亚裔 华人5天募10万 . During the event, Zach Owen and Bawi Cung took the stage to express their appreciation for the generous donations of more than $121,000 from over 2,700 individuals. President Qiang Gan and Treasurer Lin Li of ACP Foundation Dallas reported the state of the finances and various details of the fundraiser. Other organizers for the fundraiser include OCA Greater Houston (H.C. Chang and Cecil Fong); Reagan Hignojos , friend of the Cung Family; United Chinese Americans (Steven Pei); and APAPA Austin Texas Chapter (C.J. Zhao). Bawi Cung and his two boys, aged 2 & 6, were hate crime victims in Midland, TX on March 14, 2020. The suspect thought the Burmese family was Chinese and spreading the coronavirus and attacked them with a knife. As a bystander, Zach Owen disarmed the suspect bare handedly. Unfortunately, Zach’s right palm also suffered permanent injury and has retained only 40% of his grip strength. With the hope to find a better job in the west Texas oil field, Zach came to Midland from Oklahoma. The injury disqualifies him from many oil field jobs. He has also been treated for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The first $50,000 of donation will still be given to Zach on or before his birthday in mid-January 2021 to pay for his ongoing out-of-pocket medical bills, cover some of the financial deficit incurred due to the reduced working hours during his recovery period, and also help with Zach’s return to a normal life. We need more heroes like Zach Owen. Earlier on June 22, 2020, a coalition of Asian American organizations honored Zach Owen and Bernie Ramirez , a Border Patrol agent who also intervened in the violent anti-Asian stabbing with a special Lily and Vincent Chin Advocacy Award Ceremony . It was followed by the From Vincent Chin to George Floyd Webinar led by Helen Zia, award-winning journalist and community activist, and moderated by Gordon Quan, attorney and former Houston City Council member. On August 10, 2020, Zach Owen testified in the Tri-caucus Congressional Forum on Rise in Anti-Asian Bigotry during the COVID-19 Pandemic ,” which was organized by the Congressional Asian Pacific Americcan Caucus. 2020 was an unprecedented year that saw our nation increasingly divided and filled with anti-Asian hate. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. Previous Next 2020 Ends With A Positive Story

Zhendong Cheng Previous Item Next Item

Chinese Americans are increasingly finding themselves targeted by the US in what has become the new "Red Scare." August 27, 2019 On August 27, 2019, the South China Morning Post reported on the current state of fear of a new "Red Scare" and the fight including APA Justice against the targeting of Chinese Americans. "As more Chinese Americans find themselves targeted in the increasingly bitter stand-off between Beijing and Washington, legislators, community groups and legal experts are pushing back in hopes of sending a message that enough is enough," the report said. "The US has arrested scientists of Chinese origin on industrial espionage and other charges, and multiple times the cases have been dropped for lack of evidence." "Chinese-Americans readily acknowledge that Beijing targets people of Chinese descent and that the US has every right to defend itself. But a disproportionate number of recent cases end up snaring innocent people targeted through racial profiling, eroding constitutional guarantees and wreaking havoc with individual lives and the community’s reputation." "Many scientists and academics of Chinese descent also end up accused of such violations as using pornography, cheating on expenses or making inaccurate disclosures to investigators when prosecutors fail to find evidence of links to China... There’s more collateral damage than protecting against espionage." "There are some legitimate concerns, but they are inflated, and Chinese Americans are being demonised. They’re collateral damage, like children caught in a broken marriage..." Ongoing efforts call for greater accountability over the security establishment, raising public awareness, continuing to promote understanding and dialogue, building community unity and coalitions, providing training, and taking legal actions against discrimination and wrongful arrest." Read the entire report here . Chinese Americans are increasingly finding themselves targeted by the US in what has become the new "Red Scare." Previous Next Activists Including APA Justice Resist New "Red Scare"

A group of Chinese citizens who live, work, study, and raise families in Florida filed a lawsuit to combat Florida’s discriminatory property law, SB 264. May 22, 2023 Legal Docket : SHEN v. SIMPSON (4:23-cv-00208) On May 22, 2023, a group of Chinese citizens who live, work, study, and raise families in Florida, as well as a real estate brokerage firm in Florida that primarily serves clients of Chinese descent, filed a lawsuit to combat Florida’s discriminatory property law, SB 264. Signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, the legislation unfairly restricts most Chinese citizens — and most citizens of Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, Iran, Russia, and North Korea — from purchasing homes in the state. Unless the courts act, the law became effect on July 1, 2023. The plaintiffs are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Florida, DeHeng Law Offices PC 德恒律师事务所, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP , in coordination with the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance 华美维权同盟 (CALDA). The lawsuit argues that SB 264 will codify and expand housing discrimination against people of Asian descent in violation of the Constitution and the Fair Housing Act. It will also cast an undue burden of suspicion on anyone seeking to buy property whose name sounds remotely Asian, Russian, Iranian, Cuban, Venezuelan, or Syrian. Gov. DeSantis has argued that this law is necessary to protect Florida from the Chinese Communist Party and its activities. But this misguided rationale unfairly equates Chinese people with the actions of their government, and there is no evidence of national security harm resulting from real estate ownership by Chinese people in Florida. Florida’s dangerous new law recalls similar efforts over the past century to weaponize false claims of “national security” against Asian immigrants and other marginalized communities. In the early 1900s, politicians across the country used similar justifications to pass “ alien land laws ” prohibiting Chinese and Japanese immigrants from becoming landowners. These racist policies not only hurt immigrants financially, but also severely exacerbated violence and discrimination against Asian communities living in the United States. Over time, these laws were struck down by the courts or were repealed by state legislatures because they violated the Constitution’s equal protection guarantees. A group of Chinese citizens who live, work, study, and raise families in Florida filed a lawsuit to combat Florida’s discriminatory property law, SB 264. Previous Next Lawsuit Against Florida Senate Bill 264

June 12, 2020 On June 12, 2020, Science Magazine reported that fifty-four scientists have lost their jobs as a result of NIH probe into foreign ties . Six questions are raised from the report about the National Institute of Health (NIH) investigations 1. Due process? What rights do the scientists have in terms of defense and representation? How are they informed and explained about these rights? How consistent is the decision process from case to case and from institution to institution? Are the standards public and publicized? How well are the scientists informed about these standards? 2. Shift and transparency in policy? As recently as July 1, 2014, current NIH Director Francis Collins spoke in Fudan University in Shanghai to promote international collaboration . This and similar reports have apparently been removed from the NIH website with one exception of this report about NIH leaders celebrate 30 years of research with China in 2009. Why were these reports removed? When did the shift in policy take place and why? How were the scientists notified of the change in policy? 3. How did NIH start these investigations? According to Page 19 of The Cancer Letter on April 26, 2019, Michael Lauer, NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research, stated that there are three ways to identify potential problems: (a) FBI and other law enforcement agencies, (b) anonymous complaints, and (c) stewardship of NIH program staff. For the targeted 189 scientists at 87 institutions, what is the respective count by these three ways? How is their pattern and distribution similar or different from previous years? 4. Criminalizing science and scientists? If the NIH is under pressure from the FBI and law enforcement to conduct these investigations, does it undermine the standard NIH procedures to deal with scientific ethical and integrity issues that may not be intrinsically criminal? How many of the scientists under NIH investigations conduct open fundamental research and how many on sensitive research that threatens national or economic security? Does their punishment fit the alleged act? What was actually stolen? 5. How will the NIH investigations enhance U.S. leadership in science and technology? Dr. Xifeng Wu was among the first scientists forced to leave MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. She is now recognized for her significant contributions to manage the COVID-19 pandemic in China. She is a U.S. citizen. Her family still lives in Houston. How did her departure help U.S. leadership in science and technology? Same question for the 54 scientists. What threats have we mitigated by their departures? 6. Oversight and accountability? Is NIH open to third-party independent audit and review about the standards, process, and decision about these investigations? If so, would NIH cooperate with Congress and scientific/community organizations to conduct such audit, review, and oversight? In the case of Dr. Charlie Lieber, he was not charged as a spy. On February 3, 2020, Science Magazine reported that “[w]hat worries Andrew Lelling, U.S. attorney for the Massachusetts district, is that Lieber was allegedly paid to carry out research in China, which, combined with his failure to disclose those relationships, makes him potentially vulnerable to pressure from the Chinese government to do its bidding at some future point.” Are we punishing a child because one day he may grow up to be a criminal? How far have we deviated from a justice system based on facts and evidence, rather than pretext, for individual prosecutions or investigations? When was the last time the U.S. government targeted a nation and a people for law enforcement? These issues about accountability, oversight, and transparency are at the heart of racial profiling (according to the definition in H.R. 7120 Justice in Policing Act of 2020 ), justice, and fairness concerns for the Asian American community that led to the formation of the APA Justice Task Force in 2015. Previous Next 54 scientists lose their jobs from NIH probe into foreign ties

Newsletter - #132 Repair Damage Done by DOJ; 2022/07/11 APA Justice Monthly Meeting; UCA Conventions #132 Repair Damage Done by DOJ; 2022/07/11 APA Justice Monthly Meeting; UCA Conventions Back View PDF July 5, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #8 United States V. Tao Amicus Brief Sign On Request #8 United States V. Tao Amicus Brief Sign On Request Back View PDF August 7, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #209 7/3 Meeting Summary; Coalition Opposes Section 702; Meet Oscar and Agnes; Calendar #209 7/3 Meeting Summary; Coalition Opposes Section 702; Meet Oscar and Agnes; Calendar In This Issue #209 2023/07/03 Monthly Meeting Summary Posted National Asian American Coalition Opposes Reauthorization of Section 702 of FISA Without Major Reforms Science Editorial: Future Generations Are Watching Meet Agnes Hsu-Tang 徐心眉 and Oscar Tang 唐骝千 Community Calendar 2023/07/03 Monthly Meeting Summary Posted The July 3, 2023, APA Justice monthly meeting summary has been posted at https://bit.ly/46dE3CW . We thank the following speakers for their updates and discussions: Al Green , Member, U.S. House of Representatives; Member of the Executive Board and Chair of Housing Task Force, CAPAC, on affirmative action, multicultural advocacy coalition and unity, history of alien land laws and SB 147, Green-Chu Preemption Bill, March on Washington, and more Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, CAPAC, nisha.ramachandran@mail.house.gov , on affirmative action, alien land bills, and push back against legislations and amendments that are harmful to the civil rights and civil liberties of the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), gpkusakawa@aasforum.org , on anti-Asian narrative, Friends of the National Asian Pacific American Smithsonian Museum, teach-in with Mike German at the Brennan Center to demystify the FBI, and in-person OCA National panel with Dr. Xiaoxing Xi Clay Zhu 朱可亮 , Partner, DeHeng Law Offices 德恒律师事务所; Founder, Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA) 华美维权同盟, on motion for preliminary injunction, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart joining the Florida lawsuit pro bono, joint amicus brief 19 diverse groups, and statement of interest by the Department of Justice Scott Chang , Senior Counsel, National Fair Housing Alliance, on the history and purpose of NFHA, monitoring of state alien land bills, and possible lawsuit with longtime partners, Relman Colfax PLLC Edgar Chen , Special Policy Advisor, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, on the history and purpose of NAPABA, its advocacy efforts with local affiliates to combat new alien land laws as legal ambassadors and interpreters, caution against one-size-fits-all solution, critical local knowledge, holding legislators accountable, and appreciation for African American legislators in places like Alabama and Louisiana. Cindy Tsai 蔡欣玲 , Interim President and Executive Director, Committee of 100, on the history and purpose of C100, the importance of empowering local communities to address state and municipal laws prohibiting land purchases, guidebook and interactive map, standardized database of information and anti-Asian incident reports, the Yellow Whistle Campaign, and interactions with FBI field offices. Read the 7/3 meeting summary: https://bit.ly/46dE3CW . Read past monthly meeting summaries: https://bit.ly/3kxkqxP Correction from last issue of APA Justice newsletter : Scott Chang , an attorney for the National Fair Housing Alliance, said that NFHA and other organizations are still investigating and are likely to file a lawsuit against the discriminatory alien land law in Florida during the APA Justice monthly meeting on September 11, 2023 National Asian American Coalition Opposes Reauthorization of Section 702 of FISA Without Major Reforms On September 14, 2023, a coalition of 52 Asian American organizations wrote to Congress to oppose the renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) unless significant revisions are put into place. The letter, led by Asian American Scholae Forum (AASF), Advancing Justice | AAJC, and Chinese for Affirmative Action (CAA) and Stop AAPI Hate, wrote "with a sense of urgency and a shared commitment to safeguarding the principles of justice, equality, and privacy in our nation. As Asian Americans and allies, we understand all too well the perils of unchecked national security programs and the historical discrimination our community has endured. Our shared history serves as a poignant reminder of the dangers of racial profiling and prejudice in the name of national security. That is why we write to express our strong opposition to the reauthorization of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act without comprehensive reforms.""Our community is no stranger to the dangers of unrestrained national security programs. The Asian American community has a long history of being treated as 'perpetual foreigners' and scapegoated as national security threats based on our race, ethnicity, religion, or ancestry. During World War II, over 120,000 U.S. residents of Japanese ancestry were incarcerated in remote detention camps in the name of 'national security' in what was one of the darkest stains in our nation’s history. The racist rationale behind this measure was concern that any people of Japanese descent, regardless of whether they were citizens or children, were more prone to acts of espionage or sabotage."Yet history continues to repeat itself from the treatment of Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian (AMEMSA) communities post 9/11 to the current hate, violence, and bigotry against Asian Americans. In the past decade, we have had programs within federal agencies that have raised concerns and fears that race, ethnicity, national origin, and/or religious beliefs were being used to profile and target Asian Americans, particularly Chinese American scientists, researchers, and scholars. This intensified under the now defunct Department of Justice’s 'China Initiative,' which created a chilling effect on the Asian American community who feared that once again they were being scapegoated as threats based on their race, ethnicity, and national origin. "The lesson from these abuses is clear: Without rigorous checks in place, national security and law enforcement officials may act based on prejudice rather than facts. The result is a system that fosters bigotry and leaves Asian Americans open to abuse and as collateral damage. Even to this day, we continue to be convenient scapegoats. "One such authority is Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which will expire at the end of this year unless reauthorized by Congress. Section 702 allows the government to acquire the communications of non-Americans located outside of the United States without a warrant. But this surveillance inevitably sweeps in Americans’ communications as well, which agencies such as the FBI, CIA, and NSA then search for—again without a warrant. The breadth and scope of this surveillance, which amounts to warrantless access to billions of communications, along with government agents’ “persistent and widespread” violations of the minimal privacy safeguards they are required to adhere to under Section 702, demonstrate that the law is in dire need of reform. " I. Section 702 Surveillance is Overbroad and Overused. " II. Government Officials Abuse Section 702 & Impact on Asian American Communities. " III. Section 702 Is in Dire Need of Reform. "The coalition calls for the communities to spread the word by using this social media toolkit https://bit.ly/3PcehZ6 with sample posts and graphics. They encourage your organization to amplify what is at stake for Asian Americans and why this fight matters to our community. The lead organizations will also develop materials, training, and other resources to support your organizations' direct engagement and advocacy to Congress on this issue.The Washington Post reported on the coalition letter on September 14, 2023. According to the report, the coalition demands that a warrant be required to access Americans’ data in a 702-related search and place new surveillance limits to only target people possessing “information of genuine intelligence value." Civil liberties groups recently met with National Intelligence Director Avril Haines and other intelligence officials, urging them to commit to a range of related reforms to the contentious spying power that is set to expire on December 31, 2023, unless it is reauthorized by Congress. Read the coalition letter: https://bit.ly/3LkEmnt . Read the Washington Post report: https://wapo.st/44Ss6lo . Science Editorial: Future Generations Are Watching According to a Science editorial, "in many ways, the current US scientific enterprise is the intellectual descendant of 87 scientists who gathered in Philadelphia 175 years ago to establish the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS, the publisher of Science ). They joined disparate, scattered scientific disciplines to identify and address key challenges of the day."Scientists have made extraordinary advances to improve lives around the world."The world is at a critical juncture. One path leads to ethical and transparent scientific collaboration with the potential to heal the sick, feed the hungry, and protect the planet. Another path leads to barriers that slow progress, distort scientific evidence, and even use science in harmful ways. Both futures are possible, but neither is inevitable. AAAS and the research community must make an active decision to engage in the former, or the latter vision may become the reality by default. AAAS must take a leadership role to cultivate an inclusive and mobilized global scientific community that enables and celebrates scientific excellence and science-informed decisions that lead to the first vision."AAAS is committed to advancing scientific achievement. An open and inclusive scientific enterprise is essential to confronting the world’s complex problems. "Scientists need the tools to participate and build trust in the communities where they live. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed cracks in the foundation of that trust and perpetuated polarization and misinformation in many countries."AAAS must also continue to ensure that the voice of science is heard in policy-making, so that relevant, solutions-oriented, and actionable evidence is clear and available to federal, state, and local decision-makers."Does the world still need an organization incorporating the whole scientific ecosystem? Now more than ever, science is essential to the decisions that will determine the prospects for future health, prosperity, and peace. The scientific enterprise and AAAS must help shape the next 175 years and not be bystanders as history unfolds before us. Future generations are watching."Author of the Science editorial is Dr. Sudip Parikh , chief executive officer of AAAS and executive publisher of the Science journals. ceo@aaas.org Read the Science editorial: https://bit.ly/45TdMuc Meet Agnes Hsu-Tang 徐心眉 and Oscar Tang 唐骝千 According to the New York Times on September 12, 2023, the New York Philharmonic had secured a $40 million donation from the financier Oscar L. Tang 唐骝千 , a co-chairman of its board, and his wife, Agnes Hsu‐Tang 徐心眉 , an archaeologist and art historian, the largest contribution to the endowment in the ensemble’s 181-year history. The Philharmonic, the oldest symphony orchestra in the United States, has been led by giants including Mahler , Toscanini and Leonard Bernstein .Tang, who has served on the Philharmonic’s board since 2013, said he hoped the gift would help usher in a “new golden age” under superstar maestro Gustavo Dudamel , who will take the podium in 2026, with a focus on music education and social change, as the Philharmonic works to connect with new audiences, especially young people and Black and Latino residents. Hsu-Tang, who has worked on international cultural heritage protection and rescue, advising UNESCO in Paris as well as the Cultural Property Advisory Committee under President Barack Obama , said "We support institutions that are game changers — that want to make changes, that act on changes — rather than institutions that were forced to make changes because of the pandemic,” she said. “This is not just a golden age for the New York Philharmonic. It’s a renaissance for New York, and it’s a renaissance for music, arts and culture.”Hsu-Tang, who also serves as chair of the board of the New‐York Historical Society, and Tang are among the city’s most prominent cultural philanthropists. In 2021, the Metropolitan Museum of Art announced that the couple had pledged $125 million to help rebuild its wing for modern and contemporary art, the largest capital gift in the museum’s history.After the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing, Tang teamed up with the architect I.M. Pei 貝聿銘 , the cellist Yo-Yo Ma 马友友 and others to establish the Committee of 100, a Chinese American leadership organization for advancing dialogue between the United States and China.Tang and Hsu-Tang have also championed efforts to fight racial discrimination. In early 2021, the couple founded the Yellow Whistle campaign to combat anti‐Asian hate, distributing 500,000 free yellow whistles emblazoned with the slogan “We Belong.” On Tuesday, the Philharmonic announced that Dudamel would come to New York in April for a festival celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Philharmonic’s Young People’s Concerts, which have helped introduce new generations to classical music. Dudamel, who had not been previously scheduled to appear this season, will lead the ensemble’s spring gala concert and participate in educational activities.Read the New York Times report: https://nyti.ms/3Rk4UJz Community Calendar APA Justice has launched a Community Calendar to track events and activities of interest to the Asian Pacific American, academic, and other communities. You can find it on the front page of the APA Justice website at https://www.apajustice.org/ . Mark Your Calendar: The Committee of 100 will hold its annual conference and gala in New York City on April 18-20, 2024. Upcoming Events: 2023/09/19 National Voter Registration Day 2023/09/20 Committee of 100 Asian American Career Ceilings: Voting and Representation National Science Foundation Listening Session 2023/09/21 Appeals Court Hearing of Feng "Franklin" Tao 陶丰 Appeal 2023/09/25-27 AAUC National Unity Summit 2023/09/27 1990 Institute: Teaching Asian American Narratives through Literature Visit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. NOTE: Support Professor Feng "Franklin" Tao 陶丰, the first academic researcher to be prosecuted under the now-defunct "China Initiative," by attending the oral argument in Courtroom 2 of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals at 1823 Stout Street, Denver Colorado on Thursday, September 21, 2023, starting around 9:30 am MT. He is appealing one last count against him after all other charges were dismissed or acquitted. If you are not able to attend in person, you may watch it livestreamed through this link https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz4oP87ziTjb7WpRwIGZf0g . Read about his case at https://bit.ly/3fZWJvK Back View PDF September 18, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Terms of Use This document sets forth the terms of use for the APA Justice website at www.apajustice.org (“Site”). Please read the following terms of use carefully. These terms of use govern your use of this Site and all applications, software and services available on this Site. Last updated: December 25, 2018 Acceptance of Terms You acknowledge that you have read and agree to be bound by these terms of use and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including without limitation U.S. export and re-export technical data exported from the United States or the country in which you reside. You further agree to comply with all local laws, regulations and rules regarding online conduct and acceptable content. You represent you have the legal authority to accept these terms of use on behalf of yourself or any party you represent. If you do not agree to these terms of use, do not use this Site in any manner. Description of Site "Site" encompasses the website and all of its content and policies, any modifications, updates, enhancements, revisions, new features, and/or the addition of any new web properties. We reserve the right to make any Site changes at any time and without prior notice. Modifications We reserve the right to revise, supplement, update, delete and change these Terms of Use at any time at its sole discretion and without notice to you. All Terms of Use changes are effective immediately upon being posted. Your continued use of this Site after any changes to these Terms of Use will mean you accept those changes. We may also change or impose fees for products and services provided through the Site at any time in its sole discretion. APA Justice Privacy Policy Our privacy policy governs the use of information collected from or provided by you at the Site. For more information, see our privacy policy for this Site. Site Ownership The Site, including all text, logos or graphic images appearing therein, and any and all intellectual property rights associated with this Site and its contents are the sole property of the Site owners, its affiliates or third parties. The content is protected by copyright and other laws in both the United States and other countries. Elements of the Site are also protected by trade dress, trade secret, unfair competition, and other laws and may not be copied or imitated in whole or in part. All graphics, icons, and other items that appear on the Site are trademarks, service marks, trade dress and/or copyrighted works ("Intellectual Property") of the Site owner, its affiliates or other entities that have granted the Site owners the right and license to use such Intellectual Property and may not be used or interfered with in any manner without the express written consent of the Site owner. Except as expressly provided herein, the Site owner does not grant you an express or implied right to the Site owner's or any third party's Intellectual Property. The information on the Site is intended to provide corporate, product, or service information only and may not be used for any other purposes. Site Use Restrictions The unauthorized copying, displaying or other use of any content from this Site is a violation of law. The Site is for your personal and non-commercial use only. You will not (i) post on or transmit to the Site any defamatory, libelous, obscene, pornographic, profane, threatening, or unlawful materials or any materials that could constitute or encourage conduct that would be considered a criminal offense or give rise to civil liability, whether under statute, common law or equitable principles, or otherwise violate any law; (ii) copy, reproduce, modify, lease, loan, sell, create derivative works from, upload, transmit, or distribute the intellectual property of the Site in any way without the Site owners' or the appropriate third party's prior written permission or (iii) use the Site in any manner that violates any applicable laws, regulations, orders, or other restrictions. Trademarks and Service Marks There may be a number of proprietary logos, service marks, trademarks, slogans and product designations found on this Site, including but not limited to: the APA Justice name and seal. Other trademarks displayed on this Site through links to other sites are the property of the respective trademark owners. By making these marks available on this Site, the APA Justice owners do not confer upon you any of the Site's or any third party's intellectual property rights. The APA Justice trademark may be used as a hyperlink without the APA Justice owners' prior written permission. Copyright Trademark Notices All content of the Site is: Copyright © 2015-2019 APA Justice. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy Indemnification You agree to defend, indemnify, and hold APA Justice harmless from and against any and all claims, damages, costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising from or related to your use of the Site. Links to Third Party Websites Are Not Endorsements This Site may provide links to other third-party World Wide Web sites or resources. The APA Justice owners make no representations or warranties whatsoever about any other website which you may access through this Site. Because the APA Justice owners have no control over such sites and resources, you acknowledge and agree that the APA Justice owners are not responsible for the availability of such external sites or resources and is not responsible or liable for any content, advertising, products, services or other materials on or available from such sites or resources. It is your responsibility to take precautions to ensure that whatever you select for your use is free of viruses, worms, Trojan horses and other items of a destructive nature. References on this Site to any names, marks, products or services of any third parties or hypertext links to third party sites or information are provided solely as a convenience to you, and do not constitute or imply an endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation of, or affiliation with the third party or its products and services. The APA Justice owners shall not be responsible or liable, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with use of or reliance on any such third-party content, products or services available on or through any such site or resource. Notices and Procedure for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement The Site owners will investigate notices of copyright infringement and take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(2) ("DMCA"). Pursuant to the DMCA, written notification of claimed copyright infringement must be submitted to the following Designated Agent for the APA Justice owners in accordance with the DMCA: APA Justice, Attention DMCA Designated Agent, APA Justice Headquarters, contact@apajustice.org . Email/Feedback Property of APA Justice You may choose to use email to communicate with the APA Justice owners. If you choose to email the APA Justice owners, know that the Internet is not secure or private, unauthorized people may be able to intercept and read the mail you send to the APA Justice owners or mail the APA Justice owners send to you. Since email can be used to spread viruses, you should install and maintain virus protection software on your PC. To the extent permitted by applicable law, any comments or materials (collectively "Feedback") sent to APA Justice including but not limited to questions, submissions, suggestions, ideas, postings, comments or the like shall become the property of APA Justice upon receipt. APA Justice shall have no obligation of any kind with respect to such Feedback and shall be free to modify, copy, perform, publish, transmit, reproduce, use, exhibit, disclose, display, transform, copyright, create derivative works, distribute the Feedback to others and otherwise exploit the Feedback without limitation. Further, APA Justice shall be free to use any ideas, concepts, know-how or techniques contained in such Feedback for any purpose whatsoever, including but not limited to developing, manufacturing and marketing products incorporating such information. Limitation of Liability APA Justice will not be liable to you or any third party for any damages of any kind arising out of or relating to the use of the inability to use this Site, its content or links, including but not limited to loss of profits or other damages caused by or related to errors, omission, interruptions, defects, delay in operation or transmission, computer virus, line failure, and all other direct, indirect, special incidental, exemplary or consequential damages of any kind whether under these terms of use. statute, regulation, common law precedent or doctrine, even if APA Justice has been advised of the possibility of such damages or was negligent. In jurisdictions that prohibit the exclusion or limitation of liability for for incidental or consequential damages, APA Justice's liability is limited to the greatest extent permitted by law. Notwithstanding the foregoing, APA Justice's total liability to you for all loses, damages, and causes of action, including but not limited to those based on contract, tort or otherwise, arising out of your use of this Site, its content or links, shall not exceed the amount you paid to access this Site. The information on this Site, including text, images, and links, and the information on any websites, whether affiliated or unaffiliated with APA Justice, which you may visit through the Site, is provided "As Is" by APA Justice as a convenience to all users. without representation or warranty of any kind to you or any third party, inclduing but not limited to, any express or implied warranties (I) of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose; (II) of informational content or accuracy; (III) of non-infringement; (IV) of quiet enjoyment; (V) of title; (VI) that the Site will be uninterrupted or error-free; (VII) that nay defects or erros in the Site will be corrected; (VIII) that the Site or the server that makes it available are free from viruses or other harmful components or (IX) that the Site is compatible with any particular hardware or software platform. Efforts by APA Justice to modify the Site shall not be deemed a waiver of these limitations. Governing Law These Terms of Use are entered into and granted in the District of Columbia and shall be governed by and interpreted pursuant to the laws of the District of Columbia, United States of America, excluding any law or conflicts or law principle that would apply the law of another jurisdiction, and excluding the District of Columbia Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act. You expressly agree that the exclusive jurisdiction for any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms of Use shall be filed only in the federal or state court with competent jurisdiction located in Washington, DC. You consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction by such courts in any such action. If any part of these Terms and Conditions is unlawful, void, or unenforceable, that part will be deemed severable and will not affect the validity and enforceability of any remaining provisions. Entire Agreement These Terms of Use constitute the entire agreement between you and APA Justice and govern your use of the Site, superceding any prior agreements between you and APA Justice relating to your use of this Site. Use of Communication Services Site may in the future contain bulletin board services, chat areas, news groups, forums, communities, personal web pages, calendars, and/or other message or communication facilities designed to enable you to communicate with the public at large or with a group (collectively, "Communication Services"). You agree to use the Communication Services only to post, send and receive messages and material that are proper and related to the particular Communication Service. By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree that when using a Communication Service, you will not: Defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others. Publish, post, upload, distribute or disseminate any inappropriate, profane, defamatory, infringing, obscene, indecent or unlawful topic, name, material or information. Upload files that contain software or other material protected by intellectual property laws (or by rights of privacy of publicity) unless you own or control the rights thereto or have received all necessary consents. Upload files that contain viruses, corrupted files, or any other similar software or programs that may damage the operation of another's computer. Advertise or offer to sell or buy any goods or services for any business purpose, unless such Communication Service specifically allows such messages. Conduct or forward surveys, contests, pyramid schemes or chain letters. Download any file posted by another user of a Communication Service that you know, or reasonably should know, cannot be legally distributed in such manner. Falsify or delete any author attributions, legal or other proper notices or proprietary designations or labels of the origin or source of software or other material contained in a file that is uploaded. Restrict or inhibit any other user from using and enjoying the Communication Services. Violate any code of conduct or other guidelines which may be applicable for any particular Communication Service. Harvest or otherwise collect information about others, including e-mail addresses, without their consent. Violate any applicable laws or regulations. APA Justice has no obligation to monitor the Communication Services. However, APA Justice reserves the right to review materials posted to a Communication Service and to remove any materials in its sole discretion. APA Justice reserves the right to terminate your access to any or all of the Communication Services at any time, without notice, for any reason whatsoever. APA Justice reserves the right at all times to disclose any information as necessary to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request, or to edit, refuse to post or to remove any information or materials, in whole or in part, in APA Justice's sole discretion. Always use caution when giving out any personally identifying information about yourself or other people in any Communication Service. APA Justice does not control or endorse the content, messages or information found in any Communication Service and, therefore, APA Justice specifically disclaims any liability with regard to the Communication Services and any actions resulting from your participation in any Communication Service. By posting, uploading, inputting, providing or submitting your submission to APA Justice, you are granting APA Justice, its affiliated companies and necessary sub licensees permission to use your submission in connection with the operation of their Internet businesses including, without limitation, the rights to: copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, edit, translate and reformat your submission; and to publish your name in connection with your submission. No compensation will be paid with respect to the use of your submission, as provided herein. APA Justice is under no obligation to post or use any submission you may provide and may remove any submission at any time in APA Justice's sole discretion. By posting, uploading, inputting, providing or submitting your submission you warrant and represent that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to your submission as described in this section including, without limitation, all the rights necessary for you to provide, post, upload, input or submit the submissions. Termination APA Justice reserves the right to terminate at any time, at its sole discretion, the Site and/or your use of the Site. Unlawful or Prohibited Use Possible evidence of use of this Site for illegal purposes will be provided to law enforcement authorities. Please report any violations of these Terms of Use to APA Justice at contact@apajustice.org . Contact contact@apajustice.org

Newsletter - #297 12/11 Webinar - Ted Lieu; Gene Wu; Andy Kim; New CAPAC Leadership; AAJC #297 12/11 Webinar - Ted Lieu; Gene Wu; Andy Kim; New CAPAC Leadership; AAJC In This Issue #297 · Ted Lieu to Deliver Remarks at Tomorrow's Land Ownership Webinar · Gene Wu Elected Chair of Texas Democratic Caucus · Andy Kim Sworn in as U.S. Senator for New Jersey · CAPAC Elected New Leadership · AAJC Calls for Sign-on to Open Letter on Select Committee on CCP · News and Activities for the Communities Ted Lieu to Deliver Remarks at Tomorrow's Land Ownership Webinar U.S. Representative Ted W. Lieu 刘云平 will deliver the opening remarks at the webinar co-hosted by the Committee of 100 and APA Justice titled " The Impact of Land Ownership Exclusion Laws on Diverse Communities " on December 11, 2024. On November 19, 2024, Rep. Lieu was reelected as Vice Chair of the House Democratic Caucus, the fourth-highest position in House Democratic leadership. Lieu is a U.S. Air Force veteran and retired from the Reserve with the rank of Colonel. As a legislator, Lieu has established himself as a leader on artificial intelligence; the environment; cybersecurity; civil liberties; foreign affairs and veterans. As the highest-ranking Asian American in Congress, Lieu continues to champion policies promoting equity, justice, and inclusion.Register to attend the webinar today: https://bit.ly/3CEWK9p WHAT : From Past Prejudice to Present Policy: The Impact of Land Ownership Exclusion Laws on Diverse Communities WHEN: December 11, 2024, 5:00 pm - 6:00 pm ET WHERE: Webinar WHAT: Historically discriminatory policies 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 security. This webinar will discuss 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. A panel of legal experts and advocates will delve 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. This event is essential for anyone committed to upholding justice and equity in America. To learn more about current land ownership exclusion legislations, visit Committee of 100’s interactive map , which details specific bills, status, and text. Also, visit APA Justice Alien Land Bills webpage for the latest developments on current lawsuits challenging these laws and more. HOSTS: Committee of 100, APA Justice Moderator: Cindy Tsai , Interim President, Committee of 100 Opening Remarks: Ted Lieu, U.S. Representative (CA-36), Vice Chair of the House Democratic Caucus Speakers: · Edgar Chen , Special Policy Advisor, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) · Ashley Gorski , Senior Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) · Gene Wu , Chair of Texas House Democratic Caucus Closing Remarks: Jeremy Wu , Founder and Co-Organizer, APA Justice; Member, Committee of 100 REGISTRATION: https://bit.ly/3CEWK9p Gene Wu Elected Chair of Texas Democratic Caucus On December 4, 2024, the Texas House Democratic Caucus (HDC) elected Rep. Gene Wu (吴元之) as their new chair. Gene Wu has been representing District 137 in the Texas House of Representatives since 2013. He is known for his support of immigration, family and minority groups including Asians and Pacific Islanders, Blacks, and Hispanics. Rep. Gene Wu was the first legislator who brought the alien land laws to the attention of the public nationwide. He will speak at the webinar on " The impact of Land Ownership Exclusion Laws on Diverse Communities " on December 11, 2024. A dedicated advocate for the Asian Pacific American community in Texas and across the nation, Gene Wu regularly holds town hall meetings and travels nationwide, urging the community to confront the rising threat of anti-Asian legislation at both the state and federal levels. His 26-slide presentation offers a concise overview of the historical anti-Asian issue in the U.S., tracing its roots from the founding of the United States to the "China Week" in the U.S. House of Representatives in September 2024. He also presented this issue during his town hall meeting on September 29, 2024: https://bit.ly/3XN7Ujm (49:37). · Texas Tribune: Houston Rep. Gene Wu to lead Texas House Democrats through GOP-dominated legislative session · Houston Chronicle: Houston Rep. Gene Wu chosen as next Democratic leader in Texas House · Houston Public Media: Houston Rep. Gene Wu elected Chair of Texas House Democratic Caucus · Chron: Houston’s Gene Wu elected Texas House Democratic leader in surprise move Andy Kim Sworn in as U.S. Senator for New Jersey On December 8, 2024, Senator-elect Andy Kim was appointed to the United States Senate by Governor Phil Murphy , allowing him to assume office ahead of his elected term beginning on January 3, 2025. The appointment followed Kim’s certification by the Board of State Canvassers as the winner of the Senate race to succeed Bob Menendez . Kim was sworn in on Monday, December 9, 2024, becoming New Jersey’s newest senator.In a brief speech on the Senate floor, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-New York) welcomed Kim, who he called “one of the most respected and admired members of the House Democratic caucus, where his talent was only matched by his decency.” “Today, I am appointing Senator-elect Andy Kim to the United States Senate so he can begin his term in office before the new year begins,” Murphy said in an official statement. “Taking this step will allow Senator Kim to embark on the smoothest possible transition into his new role so he can hit the ground running serving the people of New Jersey,” Murphy said. Senator Kim expressed gratitude for the opportunity: “It’s an honor to get to represent the state that gave my family a chance at the American Dream in the U.S. Senate. It’s a dream that remains out of reach for too many of our neighbors, and one that I’m ready on day one to fight for. I want to thank Governor Murphy and Senator [George] Helmy for ensuring that New Jersey was well represented during this transition, and look forward to getting to work for the people.” On November 18, 2024, Senator-elect Kim addressed the APA Justice monthly meeting. He expressed gratitude to APA Justice for its efforts in addressing anti-Asian hate and discrimination and highlighted the challenges of creating a secure and inclusive environment for all, referencing his personal concerns for his children and elderly parents. Kim emphasized the importance of building coalitions to combat hate and discrimination in all forms, including policies like the China Initiative, which he described as fear-mongering. He pledged to continue fighting these issues in his role as a U.S. Senator and called on others to join him in these efforts. A summary of the November 18 APA Justice monthly meeting is being prepared at this time. Read the New Jersey Monitor report : https://bit.ly/3ZJDxfD and Governor Murphy's statement: https://bit.ly/4g6niz0 . CAPAC Elected New Leadership On December 4, 2024, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) announced its leadership for the 119th Congress. Rep. Judy Chu ( 赵美心 , CA-28) transitions to Chair Emeritus. The newly elected leadership includes · Rep. Grace Meng ( 孟昭文 , NY-06), Chair · Rep. Mark Takano ( 高野马克 , CA-39), First Vice-Chair · Rep. Jill Tokuda ( 德田吉尔 , HI-02), Second Vice-Chair · Rep. Ami Bera , M.D. (CA-06), Whip · Rep.-elect Suhas Subramanyam (VA-10), Freshman Representative APA Justice and other organizations issued statements reacting positively about the new leadership. · CAPAC Announces Newly Elected Leadership for the 119th Congress · APA Justice Applauds New CAPAC Leadership · APAICS Applauds Congresswoman Grace Meng’s Election as CAPAC Chair · NBC News: Rep. Grace Meng to lead congressional Asian caucus, replacing longtime chair Judy Chu · AsAm News: Grace Meng will lead congressional Asian caucus AAJC Calls for Sign-on to Open Letter on Select Committee on CCP Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC is preparing to send an open letter to House leadership, opposing the reauthorization of the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party (Select Committee). This letter is born out of concern that the harmful and targeted policies supported by the Select Committee—including the revival of the DOJ’s China Initiative as well as various iterations of land laws— will only continue to ratchet up anti-Asian sentiment in the 119th Congress.To read the open letter and sign on, interested organizations are asked to complete this form: https://bit.ly/4950dKv News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/12/10 National Immigration Inclusion Conference 2024/12/11 Webinar on Alien Land Laws2024/12/22 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/01/05 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/01/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/01/19 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/02/02 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/02/13-15 2025 AAAS Annual Meeting2025/02/16 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the APA Justice website at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . As part of its continuing migration to a new website under construction, we have moved the Newsletter webpage to www.apajusticetaskforce.org/newsletters . We value your feedback about the new web page. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF December 10, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #320 ACF, CALDA and AAJC Reports; Trump Invokes 1798 Law; Court Rulings Against Trump; More #320 ACF, CALDA and AAJC Reports; Trump Invokes 1798 Law; Court Rulings Against Trump; More In This Issue #320 · The Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs · Updates from Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance · Updates from Advancing Justice | AAJC · Trump Invokes 1798 Law; Defies Court Order; Rebuked by Chief Justice · Recent Court Rulings Against Trump's Executive Actions · News and Activities for the Communities The Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs Jessica Chen Weiss is Founding Faculty Director of the Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs (ACF), SAIS, Johns Hopkins University.During the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 3, 2025, Jessica introduced ACF, newly launched in February 2025, that aims to enhance the rigor and depth of public and policy discussions on China, emphasizing civil liberties, inclusiveness, and democracy as central to U.S. foreign policy. Unlike other China-focused think tanks, ACF seeks to foster evidence-based dialogue among experts and practitioners while remaining neutral on policy stances. The institute was launched alongside the report " Getting China Right at Home ," a collection of essays by 15 experts, including contributions from Gisella Perez Kusakawa of Asian American Scholar Forum and Patrick Toomey of ACLU. Seven of the 15 essays in the conceptions of grappling with China address issues of civil liberties, transnational oppression, and discrimination against Asian Americans.ACF seeks to fill a gap in Washington's foreign policy conversations by addressing the domestic consequences of U.S.-China relations, ensuring that civil rights and inclusivity are not sidelined. Jessica emphasized that these issues are not merely collateral damage but are fundamental to formulating sound China policies. There are head winds, but the institute operates under four guiding principles: rigor in research, humility in acknowledging complexity, civility in discussions, and creativity in forward-thinking solutions. This approach is intended to bridge academia and policymaking, fostering long-term strategies that account for both national security and civil liberties.This spring, ACF will focus on disseminating its research findings through meetings with congressional offices, government agencies, and policy stakeholders to encourage two-way dialogue. The institute will also launch an ideas series spotlighting key policy areas while cultivating a new generation of experts who integrate academic insights with practical policymaking. Jessica underscored the importance of maintaining open academic spaces for constructive discussions, ensuring that universities continue to contribute to informed policy debates. Through these initiatives, ACF aims to provide a central platform for nuanced, fact-based conversations on U.S.-China relations and their broader societal implications.A summary of the March 3 APA Justice monthly meeting is being prepared at this time. Updates from Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance Clay Zhu 朱可亮 is Co-Founder, Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance 华美维权同盟 (CALDA).During the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 3, 2025, Clay provided updates on ongoing civil rights litigation concerning discriminatory laws against Chinese Americans, particularly in Florida. Clay’s update covered two major legal battles: Florida’s Alien Land Law (SB 264) and SB 846, which targets Chinese students and universities.SB 264, a measure enacted nearly two years ago, is widely seen as part of the political positioning for the Florida Governor’s presidential bid. This law has been challenged in federal court by CALDA in collaboration with the ACLU and other organizations. The case is currently before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, with a decision anticipated in the next couple months. Clay stressed that the ruling will have far-reaching implications, as it is the first appellate-level decision on such a state law. Given its higher legal authority, the ruling could influence similar laws in other states, particularly Texas, where similar measures are under consideration. The second major case pertains to Florida’s SB 846 , which prohibits universities from forming agreements with Chinese entities. In practice, this has led to the termination of Chinese graduate students’ assistantship roles, severely impacting their academic and professional development.For students working towards a master or Ph.D. degree, it is essential for them to working for the supervising professors as graduate assistants, so that they can go into the lab and work on real life projects and be able to collaborate on academic papers.SB 846 basically bans all the international students from China to be graduate students at universities in Florida.CALDA promptly filed a lawsuit challenging this law. Recently, a magistrate judge ruled in favor of one of CALDA’s arguments, stating that Florida’s law interferes with federal immigration authority. The judge accepted the argument that the law overreaches state power by infringing upon federal immigration regulations. However, the court did not rule in favor of the claim that the law is racially discriminatory. The case is now under review by a district court judge, who is expected to issue a decision in the next month or two. Given historical precedent, it is likely that the district court judge will adopt the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Nevertheless, Florida is expected to appeal the ruling, which would bring the case before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, similar to the Alien Land Law case.Looking ahead, Clay noted that CALDA is closely monitoring legislative developments in Texas. If Texas enacts laws similar to SB 264 or SB 846, the organization is prepared to launch legal challenges to prevent further discriminatory measures. The outcomes of these lawsuits will not only shape the legal landscape in Florida but also set critical precedents that could influence policy decisions and judicial interpretations in other states.Through these legal battles, CALDA continues to advocate for the rights of Chinese Americans, ensuring that unconstitutional and discriminatory policies are challenged in court. Clay’s update highlights the ongoing efforts to protect civil rights and the broader implications of these cases for immigrant communities nationwide. Updates from Advancing Justice | AAJC During the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 3, 2025, Joanna YangQing Derman , Director of Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program at Advancing Justice | AAJC, reported that AAJC strongly condemned President Trump's executive order mandating English as the official U.S. language, calling it a racist attack on immigrant communities.Joanna provided a litigation update, noting that a federal judge in Maryland temporarily blocked key parts of Trump’s executive orders targeting DEI initiatives in the Federal government and corporate America, citing constitutional violations and harm to affected individuals and organizations.AAJC is also tracking land law activities at state and federal levels, particularly in Texas, where lawmakers introduced SB 17 and HB 1849. AAJC is working with NAPABA and other groups to support advocacy efforts. At the federal level, they anticipate alien land bills and are coordinating opposition with allies, including CAPAC.In addition, reports indicate that the Trump administration plans to invoke the Alien Enemies Act soon, with advocacy groups engaging lawmakers to oppose it. Lastly, Trump nominated John Eisenberg to lead the DOJ’s National Security Division, raising concerns about a possible reinstatement of the China Initiative. AAJC is strategizing with partners to monitor his confirmation. Trump Invokes 1798 Law; Defies Court Order; Rebuked by Chief Justice According to multiple media reports, on March 15, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, a wartime law granting the president broad authority to detain or deport noncitizens from "enemy nations" without due process. Trump’s order claims the U.S. is facing an “invasion” by a Venezuelan gang allegedly acting on behalf of Venezuela’s government. Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman opined that the Alien Enemies Act is a weak argument for deportation without a hearing - the U.S. is not at war with Venezuela, a gang is not a government, and it is not threatening invasion or incursion.The Alien Enemies Act was last used during World War II to justify the internment of 120,000 persons of Japanese descent and has only been invoked twice before, during World War I and the War of 1812.The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Democracy Forward, and the ACLU of the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration over Trump's expected unlawful and unprecedented invocation of the Alien Enemies Act— J.G.G. v. Trump (1:25-cv-00766) . Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the D.C. Circuit Court issued an initial temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking the deportation of the five plaintiffs named in the lawsuit. Later that day, Judge Boasberg expanded the scope of the TRO to encompass all individuals at risk of removal under the Alien Enemies Act, thereby granting class certification. This expanded TRO now protects all immigrants who could be subject to deportation under the Act, preventing their removal from the United States until further legal proceedings determine the Act's applicability and constitutionality in this context. The Washington Post reported that planes deporting 137 migrants under the act landed in El Salvador after Judge Boasberg ordered any such flights to return to the United States on March 15. Family members of some of those deported reportedly said their relatives are not gang members.On March 17, Judge Boasberg ordered Trump officials to provide the next day a sworn declaration that no one was deported under the authority of the Alien Enemies Act after his verbal order was made to turn the planes around. The judge also ordered officials to detail when the executive order was issued and provide a count of how many alleged gang members still in the United States are subject to the order. The Trump administration’s battle with the federal court system escalated sharply with government lawyers calling for the removal of Judge Boasberg and refusing to answer some questions in court.On March 18, Trump called for the impeachment of Judge Boasberg, prompting John G. Roberts Jr., Chief Justice of the United States to issue a rare and stern statement rejecting the idea and asserting the independence of the judiciary. “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision,” he wrote. “The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.”On March 18, the Justice Department refused to answer questions from Judge Boasberg seeking more details about deportations carried out under the Alien Enemies Act, leading the judge to issue a new order for the information. "The Government maintains that there is no justification to order the provision of additional information, and that doing so would be inappropriate...if, however, the Court nevertheless orders the Government to provide additional details, the Court should do so through an in camera and ex parte declaration, in order to protect sensitive information bearing on foreign relations," the DOJ filing said.Judge Boasberg responded to the filing a short time later, directing the government to answer his questions in a sealed court filing by noon March 19. Judge Boasberg has substantial qualifications in handling national security matters, having served a seven-year term on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court beginning in May 2014. He was the Court's Presiding Judge from January 2020 to May 2021. Judge Boasberg expressed frustration that the government had appeared to snub his order halting the deportations and refused to answer questions about its actions. He had reportedly summarized the government's position as "we don’t care, we’ll do what we want.”On March 19, New York Times reported that Judge Boasberg granted the government another day to share details on deportation flights, including what time two planes took off from U.S. soil and from where, what time they left U.S. airspace, and what time they landed in El Salvador.On March 24, a federal appeals court will hear oral arguments on the Trump administration’s request to lift the temporary block from Judge Boasberg.APA Justice will continue to closely monitor and provide updates on this development. Several organizations have issued statements on the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, including: · 2025/03/18 Asian American Scholar Forum · 2025/03/17 Asian American Advancing Justice · 2025/03/17 Refugee International · 2025/03/16 Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund ***** WP: ‘Very dangerous’: Japanese Americans warn of Trump’s use of Alien Enemies Act According to the Washington Post on March 19, 2025, during World War II, the U.S. government used the Alien Enemies Act to arrest thousands of Japanese, German, and Italian nationals, often without evidence or due process. Russell Endo , whose grandfather Heigoro Endo was detained under the law, has researched hundreds of such cases and found no evidence of disloyalty. “If you read the case files, they are completely innocent,” Endo said, emphasizing how the law lacked oversight and offered no recourse for those targeted. Now, with President Donald Trump invoking the same law to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members without hearings, Japanese American leaders fear history is repeating itself. Former Congressman Mike Honda , who was incarcerated as an infant under Executive Order 9066, warned that the law gives “too much power in the executive branch because it can be used at a whim.” He has worked with lawmakers to repeal the law, calling it unconstitutional and a violation of fundamental rights. The personal impact of such policies extends across generations. Larry Oda , president of the Japanese American Citizens League, recalled how his father, Junichi , was arrested the day after a military exclusion zone was expanded in California, even though he had relocated to avoid internment. Junichi was sent to multiple incarceration camps, including one in Crystal City, Texas, where Oda was born. “One of the things that affected me the most was that myself and my family had done nothing wrong. We were targeted because of the way we looked,” he said. The trauma left a lasting fear of being unfairly imprisoned. The history of wartime detention highlights the broader dangers of discriminatory policies, as seen in Trump’s recent deportations, which a federal judge has already challenged. For Endo and others, the lesson is clear: “People are using a law that is very dangerous, and the government is abusing it.” Recent Court Rulings Against Trump's Executive Actions As of March 19, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trump 's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 129 with two closed cases. The New York Times is tracking court rulings that have at least temporarily halted some of the president’s initiatives. As of March 15, 2025, there were at least 46 such rulings.Some of the recent major rulings and related developments: · On March 18, 2025, U.S. District Judge Theodore D. Chuang of the District of Maryland found efforts by Elon Musk and his team to permanently shutter the U.S. Agency for International Development likely violated the Constitution “in multiple ways” and robbed Congress of its authority to oversee the dissolution of an agency it created. Judge Chuang ordered that agency operations be partially restored and barred Musk’s team from engaging in any further work “related to the shutdown of U.S.A.I.D.” The ruling was issued in Does 1-26 v. Musk (8:25-cv-00462) On March 18, 2025, U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes of the District of Columbia blocked the Trump administration from banning transgender people from serving in the military until the lawsuit is decided. “The ban at bottom invokes derogatory language to target a vulnerable group in violation of the Fifth Amendment,” Judge Reyes wrote. The ruling was issued in Talbott v. Trump (1:25-cv-00240) On March 17, 2025, U.S District Judge Julie Rubin of Maryland ordered the U.S. Department of Education to reinstate numerous grants that support teacher-preparation programs. The ruling was issued in American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education v. McMahon (1:25-cv-00702) On March 13, 2025, U.S District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California ordered half a dozen federal agencies to “immediately” reinstate probationary employees fired last month as part of the Trump administration’s effort to rapidly shrink the federal workforce, calling the effort a “sham.” The ruling was issued in American Federation Of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. United States Office of Personnel Management (3:25-cv-01780) . On March 17, the Ninth Circuit denied the government’s request for an administrative stay. On March 14, 2025, U.S District Judge James K. Bredar of Maryland granted a temporary restraining order demanding the Trump administration reinstate federal probationary employees terminated on or after January 20. On March 18, the Washington Post reported that the Trump administration has moved to reinstate at least 24,000 federal probationary employees fired in Trump’s push to shrink the government. The ruling was issued in State of Maryland v. United States Department of Agriculture (1:25-cv-00748) News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2025/03/04 Fair Housing Rights & Alien Land Laws: Challenges and Advocacy for the Asian American Community2025/03/05 The Global Economy at a Crossroads: U.S.-China in Focus2025/03/12 MSU Webinar on China Initiative2025/03/16 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/03/30 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/04/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/24-26 Committee of 100 Annual Conference and Gala2025/04/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the new APA Justice website under development at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF March 20, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter