Search this site

Xiao-jiang Li 李晓江 Docket ID: 1:20-cr-00164 District Court, N.D. Georgia Date filed: May 8, 2020 Date ended: May 8, 2020 Docket ID: 1:19-mj-01007 District Court: N.D. Georgia Date filed: Nov. 21, 2019 Date ended: May 8, 2020 Table of Content Overview 2019/05/16 Emory University Termination 2019/11/21 DOJ Complaint 2020/05/08 Plea Agreement Overview On May 16, 2019, Emory University informed Dr. Li Xiao-Jiang and his wife Dr. Shihua Li that both neuroscientists had been terminated while they were traveling in China. They were accused of failing to disclose research fundings from China and their work for Chinese universities while receiving federal grants from the U.S. government. Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li moved to the U.S. from China to obtain a doctoral degree in the late 1980s and became a naturalized American citizen in 2000. He and his wife, also a U.S. citizen, joined Emory University in 1995 and were co-leader of the Li Laboratory. “They treated us like criminals,” Dr. Li said in an interview in November 2019 near Jinan University in southern China, where he and his wife now work. He disputed the suggestion that they had failed to report ties to China. “Our work is for humanity,” Dr. Li Shihua added. “You can’t say if I worked in China, I’m not loyal to the U.S.” On November 21, 2019, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed an unannounced complaint against Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li, accusing him of theft of federal grant funds and failing to disclose income from China. Dr. Shihua Li was not named in the complaint. On May 8, 2020, Dr. Li pleaded guilty to underreporting his income on federal tax returns. He agreed to pay $35,089 and any penalties stemming from refiling amended returns from 2012–18. The sentence includes 1 year of probation. DOJ then listed Dr. Li’s case as part of the China Initiative in its online report although it did not involve economic espionage or trade secret theft. 2019/05/16 Emory University Termination On May 16, 2019, Emory University informed Dr. Li Xiao-Jiang Li and his wife Dr. Shihua Li that both neuroscientists had been terminated when they were travelling in China. Both were professors of human genetics and co-led the Li Laboratory at the University. They are naturalized U.S. citizens. Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li obtained his doctor degree from Oregon Health & Science University in 1991. He joined the faculty of Emory University in January 1996, was promoted to full professor in 2005, and had been Distinguished Professor of Human Genetics at Emory University from 2007 to 2019. The simultaneous dismissals were for allegedly failing to disclose their sources of overseas financing and research ties in China. Dr. Li claimed that they did not receive notice or opportunity for them to respond to unverified accusations. The university closed their joint laboratory immediately, which was part of the medical school. Their websites were disconnected. Four postdoctoral students working in the lab, who were Chinese nationals, were told to leave the United States within 30 days. None were given reasons for their terminations. Emory University said its action came after an internal investigation prompted by a letter from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which had been contacting U.S. universities with concerns about whether specific grantees have adhered to agency rules regarding the disclosure of foreign funding and affiliations. Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li disputed Emory University's claim that the two researchers "had failed to fully disclose foreign sources of research funding and the extent of their work for research institutions and universities in China." According to available records, Dr. Li and his wife published many papers in high-profile journals. They have disclosed funding and affiliations with Chinese institutions, as well as biographical information posted online. References and Links 2019/11/17 Liberation: Emory University professors fired in NIH’s anti-Chinese crackdown 2019/11/04 New York Times: Vast Dragnet Targets Theft of Biomedical Secrets for China 2019/07/19 Washington Post: Scrutiny of Chinese American scientists raises fears of ethnic profiling 2019/06/17 知识分子: 埃默里大学风波又起，另一华人学者或已离开 2019/06/14 South China Morning Post: Professor at Emory University seeks legal support amid US probe into academics’ ties to China 2019/06/13 Deep Tech深科技: 埃默里大学风波再起，华人科学家称“遭到史无前例的对待”丨独家对话旋涡中心于山平 2019/06/12 Science: Emory scientist was told to vacate his office. He says move is reprisal for activism on Asian ties 2019/05/28 Radio Free Asia: US Research University Fires Two Chinese Scientists Over 'Failure to Disclose' Funding 2019/05/28 美国亚裔快讯: 华裔科学家夫妇遭开除,为埃默里大学工作23年的李晓江夫妇违规了吗？ 2019/05/28 South China Morning Post: Chinese college offers to hire two neuroscientists sacked by Emory University 2019/05/27 South China Morning Post: Scientist hits back at US university over ‘unusual and abrupt’ sacking in China funding ties case 2019/05/24 iNature (Chinese translation): Science | 首度发声！李晓江强力驳斥埃默里大学指控 2019/05/24 South China Morning Post: Emory University in US fires scientists over undisclosed funding ties to China 2019/05/24 Science: Terminated Emory researcher disputes university’s allegations about China ties 2019/05/23 Yahoo Finance: Professors fired from Emory University for hiding grants from China 2019/11/21 DOJ Complaint On November 21, 2019, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed an unannounced criminal complaint against Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li, charging him with one count of theft of federal grant funds and failure to disclose income from China. Dr. Shihua Li was not named in the complaint. The complaint became public through an NBC News report in February 2020. According to the complaint, Emory University provided the FBI with a letter, dated 12/15/2011, addressed to Li from Xue Yongbao of the Institute of Genetics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (“CAS”). The letter notified Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li that his application for a “Thousand Talents Program” position was approved. According to the letter, Dr. Li would be appointed the position of Research Team Leader at the Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology of CAS. The institute agreed that Li would work in China for six months or more before 01/01/2014 as part of a transition period. The purpose of the transition period was so Li would have “sufficient time to build a large animal experimental platform and team and undertake important national issues.” Li was to assume his position full-time (9 months each year) before 01/01/2014. Emory University also provided the FBI with a “High-level Talent (Transition Period) Employment Contract” between the Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology of CAS (Party A) and Li (Party B), executed on 12/20/2011. The term of the contract was two years, from 12/30/2011 to 12/30/2013. On or about February 10, 2015, Dr. Li began pursuing part-time status at Emory University to work at CAS. Dr. Li and the Emory University Department of Human Genetics Chairman entered into a “A letter of understanding.” Dr. Li’s stated purpose was “to spend more time to lead research projects on neurological diseases at the Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology at Chinese Academy of Sciences.” According to Emory University, Dr, Li did not complete the process and started to work at CAS in 2015. In or about October 2018, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) notified Emory University that NIH had become aware that applications submitted to NIH for Li may have failed to comply with NIH policies regarding other support, disclosing foreign financial interests, and/or obtaining prior approval from NIH for the use of foreign components on NIH research grants. In response, Emory University discussed the matter with Dr. Li between October 2018 and May 2019. Additionally, in or about January 2019, Emory University initiated an internal review of Dr. Li’s Emory University email account. Dr. Li’s emails revealed his association with the Chinese government’s “Thousand Talents Program.” On November 22, 2019, Dr. Li was arrested, and an initial appearance was held at which time Dr. Li moved for a preliminary hearing, which was originally set for December 13, 2019, but it was delayed several times. On May 8, 2020, DOJ made a motion to dismiss the original complaint and refiled with a different complaint based on a plea agreement the same day. References and Links 2020/05/08 US v Li 1:19-mj-01007: (Doc 19) Government’s Motion for Leave to File Dismissal 2020/05/06 US v Li 1:20-cr-00164: (Doc 10) Judgment in a Criminal Case 2020/05/06 US v Li 1:20-cr-00164: (Doc 4) Minute Sheet for proceedings held on 05/06/2020 2020/02/04 NBC News: Emory professor hit with criminal charge, linked to Chinese government program 2019/11/21 US v Li 1:19-mj-01007: (Doc 1) Criminal Complaint 2020/05/08 Plea Agreement On May 6, 2024, a telephone conference regarding plea and sentencing was held between Assistant United States Attorney Samir Kaushal and Peter Zeidenberg, attorney representing Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li, in the U.S. District Court in Atlanta. On May 8, 2020, Dr. Xiao-Jiang Li pleaded guilty to underreporting his income on federal tax returns. He agreed to pay $35,089 and any penalties stemming from refiling amended returns from 2012–18. The sentence includes 1 year of probation. Dr. Li's attorney, Peter Zeidenberg, says his client "admits that he should have reported the income on his taxes. And he's embarrassed by it." The judge's actions, Zeidenberg says, will allow Dr. Li "to get back to his research" on Huntington disease, which was halted when the couple's lab was abruptly shut down. But Zeidenberg thinks the case wound up having the opposite effect of what federal authorities claimed was their goal in prosecuting Dr. Li. "He would have preferred to do it in the United States, at Emory," Zeidenberg says. "He's had a successful career here, and this is where his life is. But now he is being forced to work in China. And I think that's incredibly ironic." References and Links 2020/05/20 ASBMB: Ex-Emory neuroscientist pleads guilty; fired Cleveland Clinic geneticist arrested 2020/05/17 Emory Wheel: Former Emory Biomedical Professor Pleads Guilty to Filing False Tax Returns, Sentenced to 1 Year of Probation 2020/05/13 The College Fix: Former Emory U. professor pleads guilty of hiding ties to Chinese government 2020/05/12 Science: Fired Emory University neuroscientist with ties to China sentenced on tax charge 2020/05/11 Department of Justice: Former Emory University professor and Chinese “Thousand Talents” participant convicted and sentenced for filing a false tax return 2020/05/06 US v Li 1:20-cr-00164: (Doc 10) Judgment in a Criminal Case 2020/05/06 US v Li 1:20-cr-00164: (Doc 4) Minute Sheet for proceedings held on 05/06/2020 Previous Item Next Item

Newsletter - #240 3/4 Meeting; "China Initiative"; Alien Land Laws; US-China STA Extended; Climate Bill #240 3/4 Meeting; "China Initiative"; Alien Land Laws; US-China STA Extended; Climate Bill In This Issue #240 · 2023/03/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Relaunching "China Initiative" Stopped · Alien Land Laws: Reports by USDA Equity Commission and Advancing Justice | Atlanta · US-China Science and Technology Agreement Extended Another 6 Month · Justice Is Global and Rollout of US-China Climate Cooperation Bill · News and Activities for the Communities 2023/03/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The March APA Justice monthly meeting was held via Zoom on Monday, March 4, 2024. Invited speakers for the meeting were: · Arati Prabhakar, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and Assistant to the President for Science and Technology · Nisha Ramachandran, Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman, Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa, Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) · X. Edward Guo, President, Asian American Academy of Science and Engineering (AAASE); Professor of Biomedical Engineering and Professor of Medical Sciences, Columbia University · Cindy Tsai, Interim President and Executive Director, Committee of 100 · Thông Phan, Senior Policy Associate, Advancing Justice – Atlanta · Steven Kivelson, Professor of Physics, Stanford University; Peter Michelson , Former Senior Associate Dean of Natural Sciences and Professor of Physics, Stanford University Kei Koizumi , Principal Deputy Director for OSTP, led the Q&A discussion. Cole Donovan , Assistant Director for Research Security and Infrastructure at OSTP, also attended the meeting.A summary for the meeting is being prepared at this time. The virtual monthly meeting is by invitation only. It is closed to the press. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Steven Pei 白先慎 , Vincent Wang 王文奎 , and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . AAU Letter to OSTP Director Arati Prabhakar On February 14, 2024, the White House OSTP announced the release of two memoranda aimed at supporting a secure and fair research ecosystem in the United States: 1. On Policy Regarding Use of Common Disclosure Forms , OSTP outlines guidelines on the use of common disclosure forms for federal agencies to use when evaluating proposals. These will help the government identify conflicts of commitment and potential duplication with the work of foreign governments. 2. On Guidelines for Federal Research Agencies Regarding Foreign Talent Recruitment Programs , the OSTP guidance provides a definition of foreign talent recruitment programs, guidelines for federal employees regarding foreign talent recruitment programs, and guidelines for individuals involved in malign foreign talent recruitment programs in federal projects. During the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology hearing on February 15, 2024, a letter from the Association of American Universities (AAU) to OSTP Director Arati Prabhakar was submitted for record: https://bit.ly/49qi2CV . AAU, along with several other higher education associations and research organizations, expressed concerns about the delay on the release of final research security program requirements or an update to the research community on the status of finalizing the requirements. Relaunching "China Initiative" Stopped During the March 4 monthly meeting, Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), reported that the language to relaunch the "China Initiative" was removed from the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations Act (H.R. 5893) which funds the Departments of Commerce, Justice and other science-related programs.In January , CAPAC Chair Judy Chu joined Vice Chair Grace Meng and Executive Member Senator Mazie Hirono in leading a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson , Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer , Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries on the matter.On March 6, 2024, CAPAC released a press statement on the formal stoppage of reinstating the China Initiative, a Trump-era program created in 2018 that purported to combat espionage but in effect targeted and profiled those of Chinese descent. Read the CAPAC press statement: https://bit.ly/43g5zzy On March 7, 2024, The Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) issued a statement, citing that “[i]t is a win for Asian American scholars, especially, to see the removal of the ‘China Initiative’ language." AASF and partnering organizations previously led nearly 50 organizations in opposing the reinstatement, detailing the “chilling effect” a return of the Initiative would have on Asian Americans scholars. Read the AASF statement: https://bit.ly/3wSMxDn Earlier on February 22, 2024, the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) published a position statement opposing the in-instatement of the "China Initiative." Read the ASBMB position statement: https://bit.ly/3TfeDS6 Nature Reports on Why the US Border Remains "A Place of Terror" for Chinese Researchers According to a comprehensive report by Nature on February 26, 2024, the US border remains "a place of terror" for Chinese researchers. Two years after the end of the controversial "China Initiative," academics describe being treated like spies, a loss of talent, and a chilling atmosphere that is stifling science. The report cited a Survey of Chinese Espionage in the United States Since 2000 conducted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in 2023 that identified 224 allegations of Chinese espionage against the United States since 2000, as well as the tracking of the 162 defendants in known China Initiative cases compiled by MIT Technology Review . The report covers the experiences and testimonials of · An unnamed engineer of Chinese descent, who was detained and interrogated, said border agents "are treating us like spies,” · Gang Chen, Professor of Mechanical Engineer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), · Jenny Lee, Professor of Educational Policy Studies and Practice at the University of Arizona, · George Karniadakis, Professor of Applied Mathematics and Engineering at Brown University, · Gabriela S. Schlau-Cohen Professor of Chemistry at MIT, · Yu Xie, Professor of Sociology at Princeton University, · Kai Li, Professor of Computer Science at Princeton University and Vice President of Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), · Steven Chu, Professor of Physics at Stanford University and former US Secretary of Energy, · Yiguang Ju, Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Princeton University, · Gisela Perez Kusakawa, Executive Director of AASF. Read the Nature report: https://go.nature.com/49Tv5Nn Republic Sentinel: Reports on Government Institutional Racism: A National Security Threat According to The Republic Sentinel on February 26, 2024, House and Senate GOP efforts to revive a racist Trump era program, known as the "China Initiative," targeting people of Chinese heritage are morally repugnant and endanger our national security.It would be over two months after the release of the MIT Technology Review report before the Biden administration would allegedly end the "China Initiative." The author uses the word "allegedly" because absent an independent audit of FBI cases and Department of Justice's National Security Division (NSD) records, the public has no way of knowing whether NSD and FBI have, in fact, stopped systematically targeting Chinese American STEM specialists for surveillance, including travel surveillance between the U.S. and China. In May 2022, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) released a report that stated outright that Chinese government intelligence services did not prioritize the targeting of Chinese Americans for espionage or technology theft purposes.The language suggests that the assessment in question was completed prior to February 2022, when the end of the "China Initiative" was announced. What we do not know is 1. how much earlier than February 2022, and 2. how wide the distribution of the assessment was within the U.S. government. Both of these questions matter because they go to the heart of whether such an assessment existed before November 2018 (the start of the "China Initiative"), between then and the end of the Trump administration in January 2021, or whether the assessment was only conducted and circulated in the year prior to the alleged end of the "China Initiative." If this assessment was on the books during the Trump administration, it means DoJ officials deliberately ignored an intelligence assessment stating that Chinese intelligence was not systematically targeting Chinese Americans for recruitment--and that any presumption that they were had no factual basis.Read the Republic Sentinel report: https://bit.ly/3uV8zVd Chinese Chipmaker Cleared in US Criminal Trade Secrets Case According to Bloomberg and other media reports, a Chinese chipmaker was cleared of economic espionage and other criminal charges in a setback for a US Justice Department crackdown on intellectual property theft by China under the now-defunct "China Initiative" ( Case 3:18-cr-00465 ).More than five years after the Commerce Department blacklisted Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit Co. as a threat to national security, US District Judge Maxine M. Chesney in San Francisco found the company not guilty following a non-jury trial. Her ruling may temper the Biden administration’s pursuit of aggressive prosecutions to protect American technology.Chesney concluded that US prosecutors failed to prove that the Chinese state-sponsored company misappropriated proprietary data from Micron Technology, America’s largest memory-chip maker, that allegedly passed through Taiwan’s United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) in a manufacturing deal with Fujian Jinhua.Read the Bloomberg report: https://bit.ly/3Tf3MHL Alien Land Laws: Reports by USDA Equity Commission and Advancing Justice | Atlanta On February 22, 2024, the USDA Equity Commission submitted its final report to Secretary of Agriculture in response to Presidential Executive Order 13985 On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.On Page 52 of the report, The Equity Commission recommends that USDA should support policies that lead to pathways to access citizenship and family reunification, particularly about the Right to Access Agricultural Land. The report said, "Historical racism and discrimination have led to exclusionary laws that restrict immigrants from owning U.S. properties. The 1879 Oregon constitution specified that 'no Chinaman may own property.' In 1913, in response to anti-immigrant forces, California passed the Alien Land Law to ban Asian immigrants from purchasing properties including farmlands. Subsequent laws extended the ban to include U.S. born children of immigrants and restrict land leases. Fifteen more states followed with similar alien land laws. It wasn’t until after World War II that the U.S. Supreme Court struck down these laws as unconstitutional. "Today, fueled by anti-immigration sentiments, several states are considering alien land legislation to prohibit foreign nationals from certain Asian, Central American, and Middle Eastern countries from purchasing agricultural lands, under the guise of national security protection. Thirteen states have already passed legislations to prohibit Chinese foreign nationals from owning agricultural land or lands within certain distance of a U.S. military installation. Since their arrival, immigrants of color have been perceived as perpetual foreigners. These state proposals would put specifically some communities, specifically Chinese, under unfair, discriminatory scrutiny and suspicion again." Yvonne Lee , who retired from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, serves on the USDA Equity Commission. Read the USDA Equity Commission report: https://bit.ly/4ceyXKE Modern-Day Alien Land Laws' Resurgence Throughout The South According to Advancing Justice | Atlanta, over the years, Georgia has benefited from welcoming businesses and newcomers from around the world. However, in 2023, the Peach State joined 32 other states that introduced 81 bills to restrict land ownership of target persons and entities from certain non- U.S. countries. All of these bills target people from China, though a number also targeted individuals from other nations such as Iran, Russia, North Korea, Cuba, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. Given these law’s historical connection to racist and xenophobic property restriction laws of the early 20th century, we refer to these restrictive laws as “alien land laws.” Not only do they reprise racist laws of the past, but they contribute to the current anti-Asian fervor stemming from COVID-19 and geopolitical tensions. From a legal standpoint, they violate the Federal Fair Housing Act of 1968 and Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment. Georgia remains one of a few states in the South that still has the opportunity to decide against implementing a discriminatory and harmful land law that could lead to unintended legal and economic consequences. The Advancing Justice | Atlanta report examines the history of anti-Chinese legislation in the U.S., and compares provisions across states to present a case for policymakers and stakeholders on why the policy has no place in Georgia.During the APA Justice Monthly Meeting on March 4, 2024, Thông Phan, Senior Policy Associate, Advancing Justice - Atlanta, gave an update on Georgia State Senate Bill 420 and Georgia State House Bill 1093 . Read the report: https://bit.ly/3Ik2iW8 US-China Science and Technology Agreement Extended 6 Months According to Voice of America on March 7, 2024, the United States and China agreed to extend a science and technology agreement (STA) for another six months. “The short-term six-month extension keeps the agreement in force while we continue negotiations,” a State Department spokesperson said.The STA was originally signed in 1979 by then-U.S. President Jimmy Carter and then-PRC leader Deng Xiaoping .The agreement has been renewed about every five years since its inception, with the most recent 5-year extension occurring in 2018. Last August, it received a 6-month extension as officials from the two countries undertook negotiations to amend and strengthen the terms.Read the Voice of America report: https://bit.ly/3Pm3SuD Justice Is Global and Rollout of US-China Climate Cooperation Bill During the APA Justice Monthly Meeting on February 5, 2024, Sandy Shan, Executive Director of Justice is Global, introduced its mission of organizing everyday people to advocate for policy changes promoting an equitable and sustainable future. It has focused on challenging narratives that blame China for economic and social issues in the US, recognizing the connection between such narratives and anti-Asian racism.Sandy used a 4-slide presentation in her talk: https://bit.ly/4byMnRe . She was joined and supported by her colleague Valentina Dallona .Sandy focuses on building narratives around US-China cooperation, particularly regarding climate change. Through deep canvassing, they engage communities susceptible to anti-China rhetoric, shifting conversations towards cooperation. They conducted successful discussions in rural Wisconsin, leading to increased support for US-China cooperation on climate issues. Sandy emphasizes the urgency of climate action and the vital role of cooperation between the US and China. She highlights the historic contributions of AAPI communities to scientific collaboration, framing US-China cooperation as crucial for protecting AAPI communities and fostering innovation. She outlines proposed legislation focusing on climate finance, trade, and technology sharing with China. Sandy invites support for their efforts, including messaging, garnering organizational and congressional support, and hosting community events. They provide links for individuals interested in getting involved and express readiness to collaborate.Read the summary of the February 2024 APA Justice monthly meeting at: https://bit.ly/3TzGVqr . Watch Sandy's talk and the February monthly meeting: https://bit.ly/49okkmc (57:00) News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/03/24 Committee of Concerned Scientists Annual Meeting 2024/03/25 Committee of 100: Asian American Career Ceiling Challenges in Broadcast News2024/04/07 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/04/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/04/19 Committee of 100 Annual Conference and Gala2024/05/02 AAGEN 2024 Executive Leadership Workshop2024/05/05 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting Visit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. Back View PDF March 14, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #408 Frank Wu Remarks; August Meeting Highlights; AAU on OMB Rules; Inside Higher Ed Report #408 Frank Wu Remarks; August Meeting Highlights; AAU on OMB Rules; Inside Higher Ed Report In This Issue #408 · Frank Wu Remarks on the Misleading Argument About Racism Raised During the House Select Committee Hearing on China · More August 2026 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Highlights · AAU: White House's Proposed Restrictions on International Science Collaboration "A Mistake" · Agencies Move to Implement OMB’s Proposed Takeover of Grant Making · News and Activities for the Communities Frank Wu Remarks on the Misleading Argument About Racism Raised During the House Select Committee Hearing on China At the July 6, 2026 APA Justice Meeting, Frank Wu , a leading scholar on racism toward minority communities who recently retired as the 11th president of Queens College, City University of New York, shared his perspective on the argument made during a House Select Committee on the CCP hearing, where a witness and a committee member argued that a person “cannot be racist because he is married to a Chinese woman.” Placing the Argument in Historical Context Frank situated this exchange within the broader arc of American civil rights history. Since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he noted, American society has largely rejected explicit racial stereotyping — but this is a “fragile consensus” that took decades to build, and one that does not extend evenly to all groups. Asian Americans, Frank argued, do not always fall inside this consensus because they do not fit the traditional Black-White civil rights paradigm familiar to most Americans. Instead, they are persistently viewed through a lens of foreignness and national security – particularly during periods of geopolitical tension — leaving Asian Americans subject to the enduring “perpetual foreigner” stereotype. National security concerns, he noted, have historically created conditions in which discrimination against Asian Americans becomes socially acceptable, even as similar treatment of other groups would be widely condemned. Why "I'm Married to a Chinese Woman" Misses the Point Frank directly addressed the hearing exchange, cautioning against generalizing the actions or traits of a small number of individuals to an entire ethnic community - describing this generalization as the core mechanism of racial stereotyping itself. A personal relationship, he suggested, does not inoculate someone from perpetuating harmful stereotypes about an entire community. He also cited the Committee of 100 polling data showing that the general American public holds more favorable views of Chinese people and China than many policymakers and political leaders do, suggesting that some of the rhetoric emerging from Washington may be out of step with broader public sentiment. Focus on Impact, Not Intent Frank’s central recommendation: debate over whether someone is personally “a racist” are a distraction and an unwinnable argument. Instead, he urged focusing on the real-world effects and impacts of people's words and actions, regardless of their intent — a framework he argued is both more productive and harder to deflect than litigating someone's inner character. More August 2026 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Highlights At APA Justice's August 2026 monthly meeting, Roger Innes — a Distinguished Professor of Biology at Indiana University and a leading plant pathologist — offered a firsthand account of how National Science Foundation’s (NSF's) new research security policy and Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB's) proposed grantmaking overhaul are playing out in an active, NSF-funded lab. Why International Collaboration Matters in His Field Roger opened with a vivid illustration of the stakes: plant disease resistance and food security research depends fundamentally on international collaboration, since researchers work to protect U.S. crops from pathogens that cross borders freely, regardless of geopolitics. Roger is NSF-funded and has employed numerous international postdocs over the years, including several from China — several of whom have since returned home and now run their own labs there, relationships he maintains to this day. Routine Science, Now Caught in Ambiguity Roger's account connected directly to the "vague definition of collaboration" problem raised earlier in the meeting by Kenny Evans and Tam Dao of Rice University. Practices that are entirely routine in his field — exchanging biological materials like plant seed and plasmid DNA with international colleagues, something both expected and often required by funding agencies and journals as a condition of publication — are now caught in ambiguity under the new rules. In direct response, Indiana University has implemented a policy requiring express permission before shipping or requesting biological materials to or from any lab in China, with a review process that now takes about a month to determine compliance. A Policy Working Against Its Own Stated Goal Roger argued this new review process is significantly slowing down research — and, in his view, is being used by both government and universities to shut down international collaborations outright. He described this as producing the opposite of the policy's stated purpose: rather than protecting U.S. science from IP theft, the added friction risks cutting American researchers off from cutting-edge innovations happening in leading labs abroad, particularly in China, which he described as a leader in his own field of plant disease resistance. "Jaw-Dropping": Roger's Reaction to the OMB Proposal Turning to the OMB grantmaking rule, Roger called the proposal "jaw-dropping," expressing alarm that it would politicize all federally funded work — pure science and social-support programs alike — by subjecting grant decisions to political appointee review rather than traditional peer review. He framed the scientific community's core objection simply: funding should go to the best science, not the most politically palatable science, and this policy risks effectively ending peer review as the basis for federal research funding altogether. Roger noted the strong pushback the proposal has already generated across the scientific community — consistent with the nearly 497,000 public comments we have reported — leaving an open question of whether OMB will respond to those concerns, or whether Congress will act if it does not. Roger's account puts a human face on the policy debates APA Justice has tracked closely this year — showing how abstract rulemaking translates into monthlong compliance delays, chilled international collaboration, and researchers questioning whether routine scientific exchange is even permissible anymore. His observation that China now leads in aspects of his own field underscores a recurring theme across our recent coverage: that policies aimed at protecting U.S. science risk instead isolating it, at real cost to the researchers — including the many Chinese and Chinese American scientists — who make that science possible. Report by Joanna YangQing Derman During the same meeting, Joanna YangQing Derman , Director at Advancing Justice | AAJC, reported that the House passed the FY27 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 880) on July 22 by a bipartisan vote of 216-212. The bill heads to the Senate for consideration and negotiation. As in past years, AAJC plans to send a letter to NDAA conferees outlining AAPI priorities, and is currently tracking relevant amendments in both the House and Senate versions to inform that letter. More details will follow as they become available. AAJC is also reviewing state-level "land laws" (state restrictions on land ownership by certain foreign nationals or entities) and updating AAJC's federal and state-level tracker, targeted for completion by the end of August recess, in addition to other public-facing materials, such as messaging guidance and a resource to help individuals assess their own state's land laws and identify community-level advocacy steps. August 2026 Monthly Meeting Summary Posted The August 2026 monthly meeting summary has been posted at https://bit.ly/3V4c0pj . We thank these distinguished speakers at the August 3 meeting: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Tam Dao , Associate Vice President of Public Safety and Research Security, Rice University · Kenny Evans , Fellow in Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy, Rice University · Roger Innes , Distinguished Professor, Biology, Indiana University AAU: White House's Proposed Restrictions on International Science Collaboration "A Mistake" The Association of American Universities published a detailed critique on August 26, 2026, of OMB's proposed Uniform Guidance rule — the same sweeping grantmaking overhaul we have covered extensively in recent issues — arguing that its international-collaboration restrictions go far beyond addressing genuine security risks and would instead isolate American science at precisely the moment it can least afford to. What OMB Is Proposing The rule would bar federal funds from being used for collaborations with "covered foreign countries" or "covered foreign entities" unless pre-authorized by an agency head or expressly permitted by statute, and would separately prohibit collaboration with countries under national-security-related sanctions. Central to the proposal: expanding the "Wolf Amendment" — currently limited to NASA and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy's dealings with China — across the entire federal government. The rule also imposes a "domestic-first" framework restricting awards to foreign entities, and classifies most publication and international conference-travel costs as unallowable without prior agency approval. AAU's Core Argument: This Solves Nothing That Isn't Already Addressed AAU's central critique is that robust research security frameworks already exist — federally funded institutions already must disclose foreign funding, screen for ties to foreign talent programs, and maintain formal security programs. OMB's proposal, AAU argues, abandons that targeted approach in favor of treating entire categories of international science as inherently suspect, without clearly defining the terms ("covered foreign countries," "covered foreign entities") institutions would need to comply with. Concrete Harms AAU and Others Have Identified Fundamental research with no security risk would be banned outright — including U.S.-China collaboration on public health, pandemic preparedness, and food security research intended for open publication. Multinational projects could be derailed by a single foreign participant. Stand Up for Science warned the rule could bar U.S. researchers from projects that include even one Chinese researcher — and ProPublica reported this could exclude American scientists from facilities like the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, which more than 60 nations contributed to and where China, Russia, India, Italy, and Pakistan have all supplied critical components or expertise. The Wolf Amendment expansion would effectively end U.S.-China research collaboration entirely. A recent congressional report and subsequent NASA enforcement actions suggest even routine, multi-author studies with Chinese co-authors could now be treated as restricted. The Washington Post called this potentially "the largest break in U.S.-China scientific engagement in decades" — arriving at a moment when China has now overtaken the U.S. as the world's largest R&D funder. AAU's Toby Smith told the Post : "I do think there are still members of Congress who think we have a monopoly on knowledge... That is not the case with China. We are no longer the leader in many areas of science." Even allied nations would be affected. The International Association for Great Lakes Research warned the "domestic-first" framework would hamper Great Lakes research collaboration with Canada, calling the approach "counterproductive to collaborative partnerships working on transnational problems." International Alarm The pushback is not limited to U.S. institutions. The League of European Research Universities warned the rule would make the U.S. a less attractive research partner; London's Royal Society said it was "deeply concerned," noting science has historically built bridges between nations "even during periods of geopolitical tension"; and the European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities said the rule "would impose significant barriers on international research collaboration" essential to scientific progress. AAU's Bottom Line AAU's comment letter urged OMB to withdraw or substantially revise the international-collaboration provisions entirely, arguing that "a more effective approach would build on existing, targeted research security frameworks while preserving the openness and international collaboration that have long been central to U.S. scientific leadership." A Significant Update: Senate Acts to Block the Rule In a related AAU report published on August 13, 2026, the Senate passed a bill temporarily blocking OMB's proposed revisions to federal grantmaking processes. This marks the most concrete legislative pushback to date against the rule we have tracked since its May proposal — a potentially major development for APA Justice's ongoing coverage of this issue, and one we will aim to cover in more detail in an upcoming issue. Why This Matters for APA Community This AAU statement reinforces concerns we have raised throughout our coverage of the OMB rule and NSF's parallel China collaboration ban: that policies framed as national security measures risk sweeping in vast amounts of legitimate, low-risk scientific collaboration — with Asian American and Chinese American researchers, and the broader U.S.-China scientific relationship, bearing a disproportionate share of the disruption. Agencies Move to Implement OMB’s Proposed Takeover of Grant Making On August 24, 2026, Inside Higher Ed reported that the Education Department and NSF are moving forward with their own agency-specific rules that would implement key elements of OMB's controversial grantmaking overhaul — even though the underlying OMB rule itself has not been finalized, and a Senate-passed continuing resolution has temporarily blocked it through mid-December. What the agencies are proposing: · The Education Department published a proposed rule Monday that would let the Education Secretary terminate ED grants (covering college access, workforce training, and similar programs) simply "for convenience," and would let her prioritize grant applicants who agree to lower or zero overhead cost rates. States and subgrantees receiving these grants would also have to comply with the president's executive orders — even though such orders are not supposed to carry the force of law. · NSF closed its own public comment period on a similar proposal, which includes language stating NSF "may act immediately to suspend or terminate [grants] if needed to protect government interests." Notably, NSF's proposal explicitly states one of its goals is "aligning with the proposed revisions to" OMB's Uniform Guidance rule — an open acknowledgment that this is meant to implement OMB's vision at the agency level. The "runaround" framing : Amanda Fuchs Miller (Seventh Street Strategies, former Biden-era deputy assistant secretary) argues this is a deliberate workaround: after courts rejected the administration's earlier attempts to cancel grants at will, and after the OMB rule drew nearly 500,000 public comments and a temporary congressional block, individual agencies are now pursuing the same substantive powers through smaller, less-scrutinized agency-specific rules that may "fly under the radar." She warned this introduces "huge unpredictability" for colleges, whose grants could be canceled at any time. American Council on Education (ACE) President Ted Mitchell submitted a comment on behalf of ACE and 24 other higher ed organizations expressing "deep concerns" that NSF's proposal "would incorporate many of the problematic provisions" from the OMB rule, urging NSF not to finalize its rule until the OMB rule itself is resolved. ACE's Sarah Spreitzer noted OMB has not even responded to comments on its own proposal yet, but said proceeding out of order is consistent with how the administration has operated for the past year and a half — creating chaos first, then "retroactively going back to provide the structure for those decisions." News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/09/10 Beyond the party line: Chinese American partisanship and vote choice 2026/09/11 Getting Tech Right: U.S. China Policy for a New Era 2026/09/14 AAAS Town Hall with Sudip Parikh 202/6/09/24 C100 – Men of Iron and the Transcontinental Railroad 2026/09/28 Committee of 100 Awards Gala 2026/10/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the APA Justice website at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF September 10, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #399 A Memorable Webinar Co-Hosted by Committee of 100, U.S.-China Education Trust, and APA Justice #399 A Memorable Webinar Co-Hosted by Committee of 100, U.S.-China Education Trust, and APA Justice In This Issue #399 A Memorable Webinar Co-Hosted by Committee of 100, U.S.-China Education Trust, and APA Justice On June 3, 2026, the Committee of 100, U.S.-China Education Trust, and APA Justice co-hosted a memorable webinar titled “Geopolitics, Identity, and the Fight for Civil Rights.” This is the third in a series of joint webinars titled “Global Tensions, Local Dimensions” in October 2025 to discuss the intersection of U.S.-China relations and civil rights and civil liberties of Asian American and immigrant communities in the U.S. The Third Webinar was moderated by Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director at Asian American Advancing Justice | AAJC and featured two distinguished speakers: · Edgar Chen 陳春品 , Special Advisor, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association; former Departments of Justice, Treasury, and Commerce official · Frank Wu 吴华扬 , President, Queens College, City University of New York; past chair of Committee of 100; author of Yellow: Race in America Beyond Black and White After opening remarks by Jeremy Wu , Co-Organizer of APA Justice, the lively discussions flow from one topic to another seamlessly for almost an hour, starting with the recent racist video mocking Maryland delegate Chao Wu . Cindy Tsai , Executive Vice President and General Counsel of the Committee of 100, gave closing remarks. Watch the full webinar here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v1z9g083kY (57:00) The Maryland Delegate Incident — Accent Mockery and the Spy Accusation Joanna opened the discussion by referencing a recent and widely publicized incident in which two Maryland state delegates mocked fellow Delegate Chao Wu on a podcast, ridiculing his accent and — following a legislative disagreement — falsely insinuating that he was acting as a Chinese spy. The comments were swiftly condemned by state and congressional leadership and AAPI advocacy organizations, who called for an apology and stronger standards of conduct. Frank responded by drawing a direct line from this incident to the violence that erupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. He noted that Asian Americans — who were overrepresented as doctors and nurses putting themselves at fatal risk — were simultaneously being physically attacked: shoved to the ground, kicked in the head, spat on, and in some cases murdered. The victims were not only people of Chinese descent but also Korean, Burmese, and even Latina individuals who were perceived as Asian. Many were U.S. citizens and green card holders of third, fourth, and fifth generations. The common thread, Frank argued, was the "perpetual foreigner" stereotype — the deeply ingrained assumption that Asian Americans' hearts and loyalties belong elsewhere, regardless of their name, religion, degree of assimilation, or how many generations their families have been in this country. Frank made three specific points. First, mocking accents is straightforwardly wrong — it is the cruelty of childhood bullying directed at adults in positions of public trust. He shared a personal reflection: his immigrant parents blamed their own accents for the discrimination they faced, not realizing the problem was the bigotry of others. Frank noted that he himself, despite having a Midwestern accent from growing up in Detroit, has been told his "accent" is holding him back — because the bias is visual, not auditory. Social science confirms this: people imagine an accent when they see an Asian face, even if the person sounds entirely American on the phone. Second, Frank identified a fragile but real social consensus, forged through the civil rights movement, that stereotyping is wrong. That consensus has shifted racism from being overt and unapologetic to something that polite society at least nominally condemns. Third, he warned of a new and dangerous erosion of that consensus: the logic that if one Chinese American does something wrong, all Chinese Americans become suspects. He drew an explicit analogy — if a Black person commits a crime and police rounded up all Black people, everyone would recognize that as both morally wrong and practically ineffective. The same principle applies here. Stereotyping is not just unjust; it is a poor law enforcement and national security tool. Frank closed this segment with a pointed observation: if elected officials can do this to a fellow office-holder who has been voted into office by constituents, the message it sends to every Asian American child on a playground — or adult walking down the street — is deeply chilling. Edgar agreed wholeheartedly and added a pointed ideological argument: if the stated goal is to combat Chinese communism, the way to do that is to celebrate American democracy. Delegate Wu's story — an immigrant who ran for local office and won the trust of his constituents — is exactly the kind of democratic participation the United States claims distinguishes it from authoritarian systems. Treating that story as suspicious is not only racist; it is strategically self-defeating. Edgar recalled that during the Cold War, the Soviet Union repeatedly pointed to American racism and segregation as evidence that Western democracy was morally inferior. The United States countered by highlighting human rights abuses behind the Iron Curtain. The Maryland incident, Edgar argued, hands adversaries exactly that kind of propaganda gift. Alien Land Laws — History, Current Proliferation, and the National Security Pretext Joanna presented a detailed statistical picture drawn from Committee of 100 data: since 2021, no fewer than 525 bills restricting foreign land ownership have been introduced across the country, with 63% specifically restricting Chinese citizens. The pace has been consistent: 149 bills in 2023, 126 in 2024, 133 in 2025, and 76 so far in 2026. As of May 2026, approximately 28 states have enacted such legislation. Against this legislative backdrop, she noted that Chinese-affiliated entities account for just 0.03% of total U.S. farmland — compared to Canada's 33% share of all foreign-owned agricultural land. She asked: given that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) already exists specifically to review foreign land purchases for national security threats, what does the proliferation of new state and federal legislation actually reveal? Is it a genuine security response, or a pretext for racial profiling? Frank situated the current wave of alien land laws in a century-long historical continuum. He noted that early 20th-century legislators were sometimes deliberately evasive in their bigotry, using the phrase "aliens ineligible to citizenship" rather than naming specific ethnic groups. This phrase, which appeared facially neutral, in practice applied exclusively to Asian people — a consequence of the Chinese Exclusion Act and its expansion in 1917 to an "Asiatic barred zone." Two Supreme Court cases from that era illuminate the stakes: in one, a man of Japanese descent who was Christian, spoke English, and was assimilated was denied naturalization; in another, a South Asian man who had served in the U.S. Army was similarly rejected. The Court held that there was a color bar — one had to be white or Caucasian to naturalize — and neither was deemed to qualify. The Supreme Court ultimately struck these alien land laws down in Oyama v. California in 1948. But Frank emphasized that the harms were never limited to land: fishing licenses were denied, and during internment, two thirds of those affected were U.S. citizens. History consistently shows that restrictions nominally targeted at "aliens" inevitably extend to their American-born children and grandchildren. Frank also noted that some current legislators are no longer hiding behind neutral language — they openly name the targeted ethnic group, making plain that the concern is not about foreigners per se but about people of a particular background. He offered a vivid personal illustration: as a native-born U.S. citizen who carries his passport with him because people routinely question his belonging, he asked what a real estate agent would actually do when an Asian American family shows up to an open house. The agent will not ask for a passport — they will simply assume foreign status based on appearance, which is precisely the chilling effect these laws are designed to produce. He concluded with an economic argument: even setting civil rights concerns aside entirely, the business case for diversity is overwhelming. Immigrants revitalized communities like downtown Flushing, Queens, turning what was an economically depressed area into one of New York City's most vibrant commercial districts. Every study shows that immigrant arrivals lift local economies. Excluding immigrant investors raises a straightforward question with no good answer: how does stopping people from investing in America help the economy? Edgar reinforced the historical through-line and added a crucial contemporary dimension. He noted that today's alien land laws typically invoke "foreign adversary" designations under 15 CFR 7.4, which lists not only China but also Russia, Iran, and North Korea. On its face, the legislation appears race-neutral. But Edgar observed that in practice, he has never once heard a sponsor give a floor speech warning about Russian oligarchical funds or Iranian malign influence — only Chinese influence is invoked. The targeting is unmistakable even when the drafting is superficially neutral. He also delivered what he called one of the most effective rhetorical counterarguments: Louisiana's SB 395 calls for the expropriation — that specific word — of land owned by Chinese citizens. Edgar noted that during the Cultural Revolution, Chinese Communist Party slogans called for expropriating lands from local tyrants. The irony is pointed: the legislators behind these bills are, in effect, doing what the Chinese Communist Party did, beating the CCP to the punch on Fifth Amendment violations. Expanding Economic Targeting Beyond Land Joanna broadened the discussion to other policy domains where national security framing is being applied to economic exclusion. She cited two specific examples. At the federal level, the Trump administration recently changed SBA-backed loan eligibility criteria, rendering small businesses even partially owned by non-citizens ineligible — cutting off access to capital for immigrant entrepreneurs who had been working in full compliance with immigration law. At the state level, Iowa's SF572, recently signed into law, bars businesses and individuals from certain countries including China from obtaining licensure to establish or operate health care centers — a striking move given how vital immigrant workers are to American health care, particularly in rural states. Edgar confirmed that SF572 is now law and emphasized the particular damage it would do in rural Iowa, where health care is already in crisis. He noted that the need extends well beyond physicians to include direct service professionals, nursing home operators, nurse practitioners, nurses, nursing aides — the full spectrum of health care labor. He observed a critical drafting flaw: the bill's sponsor claimed the intent was to prevent Chinese entities from infiltrating the health care system, but the bill targets individual Chinese citizens rather than state-linked entities. This bait-and-switch — framing the legislation as anti-CCP while actually targeting individuals — is, Edgar argued, poor policy and potentially unconstitutional. He connected this to the SBA issue and the broader message being sent: no matter how hard an immigrant works, no matter how scrupulously they comply with the law, even 1% foreign co-ownership disqualifies them from the American dream. That message, Edgar said, is corrosive. The Domestic/Foreign Policy Divide and Civil Rights Advocacy Joanna reflected on a tension she experiences personally in her work at an AAPI domestic advocacy organization: the issues her community faces are increasingly inseparable from foreign policy and national security debates that were once considered a separate domain. She asked how the AAPI community can best prepare itself to engage effectively on these "foreign policy" issues without being accused of shilling for Beijing. Edgar acknowledged this challenge directly and personally: his parents are from Taiwan, he has never set foot in the People's Republic of China, and he is troubled when the PRC flies missiles over the Taiwan Strait during elections. And yet, standing up for an impacted Asian American's civil rights is routinely characterized as acting at the behest of the CCP — the same pernicious logic on display in the Maryland delegates incident. He argued, however, that civil rights advocates must develop sufficient foreign policy literacy to credibly distinguish real national security concerns from pretextual ones. Understanding why alien land laws resonate — including genuine anxieties about China's assertiveness in the South China Sea — allows advocates to engage with those fears seriously and push back with evidence rather than dismissal. Frank agreed and reframed the entire premise of the "foreign influence" concern. The conventional assumption is that Asian Americans are agents of foreign influence flowing into the United States. Frank argued it is actually the reverse: throughout history, Asian Americans and the broader diaspora have been vectors for democratic values flowing outward to Asia. Reform movements and democratization campaigns in China and across the region have consistently been driven by or deeply influenced by people connected to the American experience. The foreign influence, he said, is positive and runs in the opposite direction from what critics assume. Edgar added a plug for the Committee of 100's State of Chinese American Survey 2025, which found that Americans broadly favor cooperation with China despite tough political rhetoric — a finding that underscores the gap between elite political discourse and actual public sentiment. He also noted the irony that Iowa farmers lionize President Xi Jinping because of his Iowa life experience and agricultural trade relationships, underscoring that at the ground level, the US-China relationship is often more pragmatic and cooperative than the legislative and rhetorical environment suggests. Economic Fears, the Model Minority Myth, and the Politics of Scapegoating Frank drew a direct line between Asian American success and the resentment directed at the community, citing historian Ronald Takaki 's formulation that Asian Americans have been "punished not for their vices, but for their virtues." The model minority myth cuts both ways: on one hand it flattens the genuine diversity and hardship within Asian American communities, and on the other it makes Asian American success itself a source of perceived threat — in college admissions, in the job market, in neighborhood demographics. He noted that Asian immigration has a bimodal income distribution: high-net-worth professionals at one end, Uber drivers, undocumented workers, nail salon operators, and restaurant owners at the other. The model minority myth erases the latter group entirely, which distorts both policy responses and coalition-building. Frank also offered a sober warning about the dynamics of political scapegoating. Once political leaders get people "riled up" against a group — as happened during COVID when Asian Americans were blamed for spreading disease — the anger they unleash does not dissipate when the rhetoric changes. Even if a leader does a 180 and stops blaming Asian Americans, the person who has already been radicalized into hatred will not stand down simply because the political signal changed. The emotional response has been triggered and takes on a life of its own. Edgar added that the current political moment has produced some striking reversals. The Trump administration, after years of anti-China rhetoric, recently welcomed up to half a million Chinese student visas and reversed its position on Chinese farmland purchases — running counter to the administration's own USDA National Farm Security Action Plan. Edgar asked pointedly: if the president can treat the US-China relationship as essentially transactional and cooperative when it suits him, does that retroactively reveal that the national security concerns invoked to justify alien land laws and other restrictive measures were pretextual to begin with? He cited the examples of the heads of Intel, Nvidia, and AMD — all Chinese Americans, two from Taiwan, one from Malaysia — and the TikTok CEO, who during a congressional hearing was asked whether he was a member of the Chinese Communist Party and had to explain he was from Singapore. Even the most prominent figures in American industry are not immune from the suspicion that their Asian faces mark them as foreign. Audience Q&A On political engagement (to Edgar): Edgar 's answer was direct and brief. The answer to the Maryland delegates incident is: get involved. Run for office. Talk to your neighbors. Participate in the democratic process regardless of party. Delegate Wu's story is as American as it gets, and the best response to those who would question Asian American belonging in politics is to show up. On accountability, constitutional norms, and mental health (to Frank): Frank acknowledged the genuine psychological toll of being constantly scrutinized and constantly having to justify one's belonging. The pandemic hate crimes made viscerally clear that the threat is not abstract: elderly Asian Americans were shoved to the ground and kicked in the head because of political scapegoating. The particular cruelty is that when Asian Americans speak out, the common dismissal is "what are you complaining about? You have it easy" — a response that compounds the harm by denying it. On what can be done, Frank emphasized coalition-building and showing up — not necessarily running for office, but at minimum voting, and specifically having direct conversations with family members who may be voting against their own interests. He invited every viewer to picture a cousin who voted in a way that seemed self-defeating, and to simply ask that cousin — without idealism or lectures — whether they think it will actually work out for them. That kind of intimate, personal outreach, Frank argued, is where political change begins. Closing Observations The webinar concluded with Joanna synthesizing a theme that ran throughout: the zero-sum narrative framing US-China relations as a conflict in which one power's rise requires the other's fall is not only analytically questionable but politically dangerous, because it provides rhetorical fuel for the racialization of Asian Americans as a fifth column. Both panelists advocated instead for a framework of coexistence, cooperation where possible, and vigorous but evidence-based engagement with genuine security concerns — one that refuses to sacrifice the civil rights of American citizens and residents on the altar of geopolitical anxiety. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/06/10 Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes - Calvin Tsao 2026/06/17 Voting Barriers for AA & NH/PI Women 2026/06/27-28 From Crisis to Coalition: Lessons from the Front Lines in Minneapolis/St. Paul 2026/06/28-07/01 UCA: 2026 Chinese American Convention 2026/07/04 Unveiling of Mabel Ping-Hua Lee Mural 2026/07/06 APA Justice Monthly MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. APA Justice April 2026 Monthly Meeting Summary Posted Summary for the April 2026 APA Justice monthly meeting has been posted at https://bit.ly/4umOf7S . We thank these distinguished speakers for sharing their insightful remarks and updates: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus · Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) · Eric Zheng , President, The American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai · Susan A. Thornton , Vice Chair, U.S. Heartland China Association · Susan Shirk , Research Professor; Director Emerita, 21st Century China Center, University of California, San Diego # # # 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 . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF June 10, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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

Newsletter - #228 1/8 Monthly Meeting; "China Initiative;" US-China Ties; CA Leaders in Higher Ed; + #228 1/8 Monthly Meeting; "China Initiative;" US-China Ties; CA Leaders in Higher Ed; + In This Issue #228 · Reminder: 2023/01/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Opposition to Revive "China Initiative" · 45th Anniversary of US-China Diplomatic Ties · Book: The Rise of Chinese American Leaders in U.S. Higher Education: Stories and Roadmaps · News and Activities for the Communities Reminder: 2024/01/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, January 8, 2023, starting at 1:55 pm ET. In addition to updates by Joanna Derman, Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC and Gisela Perez Kusakawa, Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), confirmed and invited speakers include: · Rep. Judy Chu 赵美心, Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, to kick off the New Year with us by reviewing 2023 and looking to what is ahead in 2024. · Haipei Shue 薛海培, President, United Chinese Americans (UCA), Hongwei Shang 商红伟, and Echo King 金美声, Co-Founders of Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA) to give us a report on December 16 Justice4All protest in Miami. · Ted Gong, Executive Director of the 1882 Foundation will introduce the 1882 Project, 1882 Foundation, and its upcoming activities in 2024, and Martin Gold , Pro Bono Counsel, 1882 Project; Partner, Capitol Counsel, LLC, on a future lecture. · Dr. Yawei Liu 刘亚伟, Senior Advisor, China Focus, Carter Center to introduce us to the China Focus at the Carter Center and the upcoming Conference for the 45th Anniversary of U.S.-China Relations in Atlanta. The monthly meeting is by invitation only. It is closed to the press. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Steven Pei 白先慎, Vincent Wang 王文奎, and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . Opposition to Revive "China Initiative" The Department of Justice (DOJ) ended the China Initiative nearly two years ago. It targeted mostly ethnic Chinese academics and their links to China. The program was stopped after criticism of racial profiling. Now, a proposed House spending bill wants to bring the initiative back. According to a NPR report on January 2, 2024, about 90% of the more than 70 cases prosecuted under the initiative involved people who were ethnically Chinese. Just about a quarter were convicted and usually for much lesser charges. Charges against MIT Professor Gang Chen were all dismissed - he had done nothing wrong, but the damage has been lasting on him and his wife. Professor Chen told NPR, "The China Initiative has fundamentally harmed the U.S. competitiveness. The biggest competition is on talents. And that really deterred a lot of talents coming to the U.S."NPR also interviewed Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director at the Asian American Scholar Forum, John Yang , president of Advancing Justice | AAJC, and Baimadajie Angwang , New York Police Department Officer who was also charged with being an unregistered foreign agent for China under the China Initiative and also had all the charges against him dismissed. Read the NPR report: https://n.pr/3NPexgA .On December 7, 2023, a coalition of over 50 organizations wrote to Congressional leaders Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, Mike Johnson, and Hakim Jeffries to voice their concerns and strong opposition to reinstate the “China Initiative.” Read the letter: https://bit.ly/47oQP1F . Alien Land Laws Among Top Community Concerns in 2024 In 2023, an onslaught of federal and state legislation was started to prohibit property ownership by citizens of foreign countries (i.e. “alien land laws”). It has raised alarm and response throughout the Asian American community and is expected to continue in 2024. According to a Legal Sidebar by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), during the first six months of 2023, at least 15 states enacted legislation regulating foreign ownership of real property. A group of plaintiffs filed a legal challenge to one state law—Florida’s Senate Bill 264 (SB 264)—arguing that it violates their constitutional rights, does not comport with the federal Fair Housing Act, and is preempted by federal law.The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a Statement of Interest in the case supporting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and arguing that the Fair Housing Act bars SB 264. The statute declares invalid “any law of a State” that permits or requires a discriminatory housing practice. In addition, the United States argues, SB 264 violates the Equal Protection Clause, because it discriminates based on alienage and national origin without justification. While the federal government has more leeway in regulating alienage, the United States explains, state classifications singling out aliens must be narrowly tailored in pursuit of a compelling government interest. The United States maintains that the law “will not advance the State’s purported goal of increasing public safety,” as Florida has not identified “any legitimate connection between protecting the State” and barring individuals of certain nationalities from owning real property. Plaintiffs, the United States points out, are not members of the PRC government or of the Communist Party of China and are not representatives of their country of origin.Read the CRS Legal Sidebar: https://bit.ly/41N2QwM According to the South China Morning Post on December 16, 2023, Chinese land ownership in US was down 2 per cent in 2022 amid heightened national security concerns. Agriculture Department data reveals holdings fell to nearly 350,000 acres, just shy of 1 per cent of all foreign-held American land. Read the South China Morning Post Report: https://bit.ly/48MC4qR According to a New York Times opinion by Professor Mae Ngai of Columbia University, her parents faced discrimination when attempting to buy land in northern New Jersey due to their Chinese heritage in the 1950s. This discrimination was part of a broader history of racial segregation in the United States, with practices like racial covenants and alien land laws preventing certain groups, including Asians, from owning property. Fast forward to the present day, similar discriminatory measures are resurfacing, with some states passing laws to restrict Chinese nationals, Chinese-owned companies, or the Chinese government from buying land near critical infrastructure like military facilities and airports. Several states have already implemented such laws, with others considering similar measures, and some proposals have been introduced at the federal level targeting foreign land ownership.Citing national security concerns as a reason to prevent foreign adversaries and entities from owning U.S. property, these laws, exemplified by Florida's land bill, target Chinese nationals and companies, promoting a view that associates all Asians, especially Chinese people, with being enemies of America. This echoes a long history of discriminatory legislation dating back to the "yellow peril" fears of the 19th century, which restricted Asian rights and immigration. The contemporary wave of anti-Chinese measures is not entirely new; it was exacerbated during the Trump administration, blaming China for the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in racist assaults on Asian Americans. Policies like the China Initiative, initially aimed at intellectual property theft, unfairly targeted Chinese and Chinese American academics without evidence of wrongdoing. Although disbanded, it left a chilling effect on ethnic Chinese scientists in the U.S., affecting their job security and deterring future talent from coming to the country. The justification for these measures, rooted in national security concerns, seems overstated. Statistics show that the ownership of agricultural land by foreign nationals, especially Chinese, is minimal, contradicting the perceived threat. The narrative framing China as an adversary serves political expediency but carries severe consequences, including racial harassment and discrimination against Asian Americans.While the Biden Administration has attempted to ease tensions, like President Joe Biden 's meeting with President Xi Jinping and calls for trade relationship "derisking," the persistent linkage of trade and national security perpetuates discrimination against Chinese and Asian Americans. This echoes a history of injustice, such as the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, which took decades to receive an official apology.Professor Ngai's parents, immigrants from China, eventually found success in their careers and in buying a home, benefiting from the civil rights gains. However, they would likely express concerns about current U.S. policies towards China today, recognizing the potential impact and targeting of individuals like themselves due to their heritage.Read the New York Times opinion: https://nyti.ms/3H9GLiE On December 15, 2023, the Committee of 100 (C100) issued a statement to denounce the legislation in Florida, Texas and additional states that would limit the ability of non-U.S. citizens to purchase land in their state. To track the recent surge of legislation prohibiting property ownership by Chinese citizens (including permanent residents) across the U.S., C100 launched a new database that identifies and explains such legislation considered, and in some cases passed, by Congress and state governments.The webpage features an interactive map of the United States that visually demonstrates the data. The data can be filtered by the provisions included in the legislation, including the types of entities prohibited from owning property (e.g. Chinese citizens, businesses headquartered in China) and the types of properties prohibited from ownership (e.g. residential, commercial, agricultural property).C100’s database, tracking the legislation and documenting resources on the subject, will be updated on a quarterly basis.Read the C100 announcement: https://bit.ly/41NWtJG On December 16, 2023, hundreds braved a stormy day in Miami to protest the unfair legislation of Florida's SB264 and SB846 state laws. The rally was an urgent call for unity and justice, aiming to bring together concerned citizens of all backgrounds and all ethnicities in opposition to injustice and unfair treatment going on in Florida right now. Elected officials and community leaders from across the country actively participated and delivered inspirational speeches. Visit the FAAJA website at https://www.faaja.org/ for more reports. Read the West Orlando News report: https://bit.ly/3TRjlpI 45th Anniversary of US-China Diplomatic Ties According to multiple media reports, President Joe Biden and President Xi Jinping exchanged greetings on January 1, 2024, which marked the 45th anniversary of US-China diplomatic ties. The two countries are trying to restore relations that have reached their most confrontational point in the 45 years since ties were established in 1979. Beijing and Washington officially established ties on January 1, 1979, based on agreements reached after years of negotiations. On the same date, Washington officially switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing.In his letter to Biden, Xi said the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the US was a “major event” in the history of bilateral and international relations. “Over the past 45 years, China-US relations have gone through ups and downs but have generally moved forward, which has not only enhanced the well-being of the two peoples, but also promoted world peace, stability and prosperity,” he said.Biden responded that since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1979, the relationship between the US and China had promoted prosperity and opportunities for the US, China and the world. “I am committed to responsibly managing this important relationship. I look forward to building on the progress made by our predecessors and our many meetings and discussions as we continue to advance the US-China relationship,” Biden said. The Carter Center will honor President Jimmy Carter and commemorate the 45th anniversary of the normalization of U.S.-China relations during a conference in Atlanta on January 9, 2024. World-renowned experts will participate in panel discussions on different dimensions of the U.S.-China diplomatic, military, and economic relationship. A gala dinner to celebrate President Carter’s legacy promoting peace in East Asia will follow the conference in the evening. Both events are open to the public. For more information, visit https://bit.ly/3TQYG58 Book: The Rise of Chinese American Leaders in U.S. Higher Education: Stories and Roadmaps A new book titled "The Rise of Chinese American Leaders in U.S. Higher Education: Stories and Roadmaps" has been published by Springer Nature. It is a collection of 36 stories and reflections that represent Chinese American leaders and depict their tortuous journeys in U.S. higher education that comes at a critical point in time. Many books have been devoted to academic leadership, but this volume uniquely focuses on subjects most relevant to Chinese Americans. We live at a time that not only witnesses an increase in Chinese American leaders on U.S. campuses but also mounting incidents of discriminatory treatment of this group. They represent leaders holding different ideological values in various academic fields, positions, stages of careers, professional trajectories, generations, Chinese ethnic groups, and geographical locations. Read more about the book at https://bit.ly/48eNQu5 . If you wish to submit a formal review of the book, please visit: https://bit.ly/48p7J1t . News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/01/08 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/01/09 The Jimmy Carter Forum on US-China Relations in Honor of 45th Anniversary of Normalization2024/01/20 White House Initiative AA and NHPI Economic Summit in Metro Atlanta2024/01/17 Committee of 100 - Are Asian Americans Paid Less in Business?2024/02/04 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/02/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/03/03 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. Back View PDF January 7, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #116 "China Initiative" Briefing; AAASE Lecture; Editorials; 3/7 Meeting; Hate Crime Update #116 "China Initiative" Briefing; AAASE Lecture; Editorials; 3/7 Meeting; Hate Crime Update Back View PDF March 1, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

June 7, 2019 A fallout from racial profiling Chinese American scientists is the loss of talent by the U.S. in an increasingly competitive world for talents. A June 7, 2019 Asian Times article provides ample current and past examples and a succinct summary of how " US will regret persecuting Chinese scientists . " Racial profiling harms the long-term interests of America by forcing talented and renowned scientists, many of them naturalized U.S. citizens, out of the country into the welcoming arms of China. Ironically, profiling those in China's talent recruitment programs actually facilitates China’s recruitment. Stigmatizing all students from China, which exceeded 350,000 at US universities in 2017, as potential spies for China will not enhance but harm the pipeline of American research and innovation. This May 29 essay titled " My Science Has No Nationality " by a young Chinese American female physicist describes the plight of many of today's Chinese American scientists. 2019/07/15 Inside Higher Ed: Attacking Chinese on Our Campuses Only Hurts America Examples of America's Lost Talents Dr. Xin Zhao , a prize-winning applied physicist from the College of William and Mary in Virginia, had to relocate his startup venture to commercialize some of the school’s patented nanotechnology from the U.S. to China after a federal investigation that included a failed sting, airport stops and an unfounded child-porn search. Dr. Chunzai Wang , a U.S. citizen and one of the foremost experts on ocean-atmosphere interaction, climate change, and hurricanes in the world, is now a member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in China. He was a research oceanographer in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). He received the NOAA Research Scientist of the Year award in 2012 and 2013. Dr. Xifeng Wu , a U.S. citizen, is now Dean of School of Public Health, Vice President for the Second Affiliated Hospital and the Director for National Institute of Health Big Data, Zhejiang University in China. She was Director, Center for Public Health and Translational Genomics and Professor, Department of Epidemiology at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in January 2019. Dr. Xiaorong Wang is now a Distinguished Professor of School of Chemical Science and Engineering and of Institute for Advanced Study at Tongji University at Shanghai, China. He was a project and group leader at Bridgestone Americas Center for Research and Technology and received the Bridgestone/Firestone CEO Award for distinguished research. Dr. Xuesen Qian (1911-2009) is known as the founder of engineering cybernetics and father of the space program for China. He was a co-founder of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in the U.S. During the Second Red Scare in the 1950s, the U.S. government accused him of communist sympathies. After spending five years under house arrest, he was released in 1955 and deported to China. The head of the US Navy at the time was quoted as saying that Qian’s deportation was "the stupidest thing this country ever did. He was no more a communist than I was and we forced him to go.” Latest from BBC: Qian Xuesen: The scientist deported from the US who helped China into space Previous Next America Loses Talent by Racial Profiling

Newsletter - #61 DOC Unit Abused Power! Memorable May 20; Stop AAPI Hate And Racial Profiling #61 DOC Unit Abused Power! Memorable May 20; Stop AAPI Hate And Racial Profiling Back View PDF May 24, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #373 Support Dr. Jane Wu; Death of Renee Good/AAPI Reactions; ICE Detention; AAJC Update+ #373 Support Dr. Jane Wu; Death of Renee Good/AAPI Reactions; ICE Detention; AAJC Update+ In This Issue #373 · Support Justice & Honor the Memory of Dr. Jane Ying Wu · Tragic Death of Renee Nicole Good · Asian Pacific Americans Respond · Deadly ICE Detention · Update from Advancing Justice | AAJC · News and Activities for the Communities Support Justice & Honor the Memory of Dr. Jane Ying Wu 吴瑛 Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), the Federation of Asian Professor Associations (FAPA), and concerned faculty call for university faculty members to add their names to a sign-on letter expressing deep concern over the recent allegations by the Estate of Dr. Jane Ying Wu regarding the treatment of the late Dr. Jane Ying Wu 吴瑛 , a prominent scientist and U.S. citizen, by Northwestern University. Dr. Wu was not only a brilliant scientist who loved her work and had dreams to help others through science, but also a loving mother. Her daughter, Elizabeth Rao , born in California and raised in the Midwest, described memories of her mother to NBC News , sharing how her mother would “turn simple houses into warm homes” and how the “two would also sing along to tunes during long drives.” This is a loss that can never be rectified for the family, but we hope we can live up to her memory. As her daughter said to NBC, “We carry this with us: her upstanding morals and conviction to fight against injustice.” Deadline to sign on by faculty members to the coalition letter at https://bit.ly/49sPons is January 29, 2026, at 12 pm Eastern Time. Read the story of Dr. Jane Ying Wu: https://bit.ly/4sMDvQD Tragic Death of Renee Nicole Good On January 7, 2026, 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good —a U.S. citizen, mother of three, writer, and community member—was fatally shot by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent during a large federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The operation was part of what the Department of Homeland Security described as one of the largest ICE deployments in the U.S. at the time, involving thousands of agents. Good was shot after she moved her vehicle during an encounter with officers; video footage shows an ICE agent fire multiple shots while staying on his feet as the vehicle passed. Good died from gunshot wounds at a local hospital. According to wide media reports, significant developments since the incident include: National Outcry and Protests. Renee Nicole Good’s death triggered immediate protests in Minneapolis, followed by solidarity demonstrations in major cities nationwide. Protesters condemned ICE’s use of lethal force in a residential neighborhood and called for independent accountability, an end to militarized immigration enforcement, and clearer limits on federal agents operating in local communities. State and local officials, while condemning the shooting and calling for accountability, repeatedly urged the public to engage in peaceful protest and avoid violence, emphasizing the importance of protecting both constitutional rights and community safety. “We Had Whistles. They Had Guns.” Good’s wife, Becca Good , released a statement explaining that the couple had been attempting to alert neighbors and de-escalate tensions during the ICE operation. Her words—“We had whistles. They had guns.”—quickly became a rallying cry, appearing on protest signs, social media, and opinion pieces. The phrase underscored the asymmetry of force and the civilian nature of the couple’s actions. Massive GoFundMe Support . A GoFundMe campaign established to support Good’s family drew tens of thousands of donors and raised more than $1.5 million in a matter of days, far surpassing its initial goal. The campaign was later closed, and the funds were placed into a trust to provide long-term support for Good’s spouse and family, reflecting the breadth of public sympathy and outrage. High-Profile Legal Representation . Good’s family retained Romanucci & Blandin, the Chicago-based civil rights law firm known for representing George Floyd ’s family and other high-profile police accountability cases. The firm announced it would conduct its own independent investigation, preserve evidence, and pursue all available civil and constitutional claims against responsible parties. Local Officials Reject the Federal Narrative . Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey , Minnesota Governor Tim Walz , and other state and local officials publicly disputed the federal government’s characterization of Renee Good as a threat. They challenged ICE’s assertion of self-defense and emphasized that local authorities had not been consulted in advance of the operation. Their statements widened the rift between state and federal officials and intensified calls for transparency. A lawsuit was filed against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Secretary Kristi Noem to stop the surge of federal law enforcement agents, including ICE, in the state. Judge Orders Curbs . A federal judge in Minnesota ordered that U.S. immigration agents deployed en masse to Minneapolis be restricted in some of the tactics they have taken against peaceful demonstrators and observers, including arrests and tear-gassing. FBI Assumes Control of the Investigation . The FBI took over the investigation into the shooting. The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension withdrew after being informed it would not receive full access to evidence, including federal agent statements and certain forensic materials. This withdrawal raised significant concerns among civil rights advocates and lawmakers about transparency, independence, and public trust. Frame-by-Frame and Open-Source Analysis . Journalists, legal analysts, and open-source investigators began conducting frame-by-frame reviews of available body-camera footage, surveillance video, and audio recordings. These analyses questioned the immediacy of the threat claimed by ICE agents and highlighted discrepancies between official statements and visual evidence, further fueling public skepticism. Threat of Military Occupation . President Donald Trump publicly threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy active-duty military forces to Minneapolis, citing unrest following the shooting. The remarks drew sharp criticism from state officials, constitutional scholars, and civil liberties groups, who warned that such action would dangerously escalate tensions and undermine civilian governance. Justice Department Mass Resignations . In the weeks following the incident, multiple Justice Department officials—including career prosecutors and civil rights staff—reportedly resigned or sought transfers. Public reporting and statements from former officials indicated concerns over political interference, pressure to align with the federal narrative, and the sidelining of standard civil rights review processes. These departures intensified scrutiny of the DOJ’s independence and credibility. Broader Immigration Enforcement Context . Good’s death became emblematic of a broader pattern of fatal encounters involving ICE and other federal enforcement agencies since 2025. Civil rights groups documented multiple incidents involving aggressive tactics, heavily armed agents, and limited coordination with local authorities. Advocates argued that the shooting reflected systemic issues rather than an isolated tragedy. Public Opinion Poll . In a survey by Quinnipiac University, days after 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed, 53% said the shooting was not justified, and 35% said it was. Another 12% of respondents did not state an opinion. Asian Pacific Americans Respond In the wake of the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an ICE agent in Minneapolis on January 7, 2026, a wide range of Asian American and allied civil rights, advocacy, and community groups have expressed outrage, solidarity, and calls for accountability. Asian Americans, especially Hmongs, in Minnesota are reportedly targeted as Federal immigration agents are trying to get Minnesota residents to racially profile their neighbors for deportation. An AsAmNews OpEd discusses the impact of ICE raids in Minnesota and explores Minnesota’s history of supporting refugee communities, their contributions to civic identity, and the challenges posed by racialized immigration policies. State and local Asian American leaders and members of AAPI coalitions have participated in vigils, peaceful protests, and community discussions emphasizing lawful, peaceful action and solidarity with immigrant families. Tri-Caucus Statement . Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Chair Rep. Grace Meng (NY-06), Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Chair Rep. Yvette Clarke (NY-09), and Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) Chair Rep. Adriano Espaillat (NY-13)—along with Congressional Progressive Caucus Deputy Chair Rep. Ilhan Omar (MN-05), issued a joint statement condemning the deadly shooting in Minneapolis and called for accountability and suspension of ICE operations in Minnesota. AAUC Town Hall and Op-Ed . The Asian American Unity Coalition (AAUC) held an online town hall meeting to bring together community members and allies to process the tragedy of Renee Good and build solidarity in the face of federal overreach. Dr. SK Lo , Board Chair of AAUC and a resident of Minneapolis, addresses in an op-ed the recent killing of Renee Nicole Good, a white woman, by an ICE agent in Minneapolis, highlighting the lack of evidence that she posed a threat and questioning the motives behind aggressive immigration enforcement. She critiques the surge in ICE arrests as political theater rather than necessary policy, emphasizing the broader consequences of such actions, including the erosion of compassion and justice in America. Dr. Lo reflects on the complex realities of undocumented immigration, the historical context of American identity as a nation of immigrants, and the need for accountability and humane policies. She calls for leaders to prioritize compassion and dignity for immigrant communities, reaffirming the values that define democracy. Community Statements . Asian American organizations including Asian American Advancing Justice - Atlanta , National Federation of Filipino American Associations , OCA National Center , and Stop AAPI Hate issued formal statements condemning the killing as part of a pattern of dangerous, militarized federal enforcement that endangers immigrant and broader communities nationwide, and joined growing demands for a thorough, independent investigation into the incident. Deadly ICE Detention According to Russell Jeung 張華耀 , Professor of Asian American studies at San Francisco State University and co-founder of Stop AAPI Hate, in 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recorded its deadliest year in two decades, with over 30 detainee deaths, including five Asian nationals. These deaths highlight the dangerous conditions within ICE facilities, such as neglect, abuse, delayed medical care, and language barriers, which exacerbate the suffering of detainees. The case of Chaofeng Ge , a 32-year-old detainee found dead under suspicious circumstances, underscores the lack of transparency and accountability in ICE operations. Ge was found hanging in a shower stall at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Philipsburg, Pennsylvania. While investigators ruled his death a suicide, the autopsy report stated that he was found with his hands and feet tied behind his back, raising questions about the circumstances of his death. Ge’s family has struggled to obtain records about his death, and his isolation due to the absence of Mandarin interpretation further illustrates systemic failures in detention centers. The impact of ICE’s mass deportation policies extends beyond detention centers, instilling fear and trauma in Asian American communities. With 1 in 7 Asian immigrants undocumented and vulnerable to deportation, families face threats of separation and racial profiling. Historical parallels are drawn to 19th-century immigration laws that targeted Chinese immigrants, showing how racialized deportation practices have persisted over time. Cases like Yunseo Chung , a Korean American student targeted for deportation after exercising free speech, and the forced separation of 6-year-old Yuanxin Zheng from his father, exemplify the human cost of these policies. The article calls for an end to for-profit prisons, family separations, and racially discriminatory enforcement practices, which have caused lasting trauma and fear among Asian American communities. Professor Jeung emphasizes that these policies do not enhance national security but instead perpetuate systemic injustice and harm. He advocates for justice for victims like Ge and broader reforms to create a fair and humane immigration system. Read Professor Jeung’s report: https://bit.ly/4jy3o2D U pdate from Advancing Justice | AAJC During the APA Justice monthly meeting on January 6, 2026, Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC, highlighted a major near-term advocacy development following the release of a congressional appropriations “minibus” covering Commerce, Justice, and Science, Energy and Water, and Interior funding. The bill, which recently passed the House, removed language that would have directed the Department of Justice to reinstate the China Initiative, a result she described as a significant victory for Asian American and Pacific Islander communities. She emphasized that the outcome reflects sustained coalition advocacy and community engagement raising concerns about the initiative’s harmful impact on Chinese American and Asian American scientists, researchers, and scholars. The bill will now move to the Senate. She noted that coalition partners are preparing a coordinated press statement to coincide with the House floor vote, underscoring continued vigilance against policies that unfairly target Asian American communities. While celebrating the outcome internally, Joanna explained that organizations are being strategic in their public messaging to avoid prompting renewed efforts to reintroduce similar language in future appropriations cycles. She thanked partners for their coordination and persistence, acknowledging that the appropriations process is often opaque and requires sustained, behind-the-scenes engagement to achieve meaningful results. Joanna also provided a year-end update on advocacy around the FY26 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). She reported that Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC and coalition partners successfully blocked seven of the eight harmful provisions they formally opposed, including measures restricting academic research, discriminatory land-use proposals, and provisions targeting LGBTQ+ service members and families. While noting that the final bill still contained concerning anti-DEI language and was far from perfect, she underscored the progress made in a challenging legislative environment. With the NDAA now signed into law, AAJC will continue monitoring implementation, mitigating harms where possible, and engaging early in the next fiscal year. A summary of the January 5 APA Justice monthly meeting is being prepared at this time. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/01/21 Perception and Reality: What U.S.–China Relations Mean for Chinese Americans Today 2026/01/28 Elliot L. Richardson Prize for Exceptional Public Service 2026/01/29-30 The Jimmy Carter Forum on U.S.-China Relations2026/02/02 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2026/02/11 Conversations, Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes: BD Wong Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the new APA Justice website under development at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF January 20, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Gee-Kung Chang 張繼昆 Docket ID: 1:21-cr-00109 District Court, N.D. Georgia Date filed: Mar 18, 2021 Date Ended: Apr 14, 2025 Robert Fisher , Partner at Nixon Peabody, was the defense attorney for MIT Professor Gang Chen 陈刚 . He spoke at the APA Justice monthly meeting on May 5, 2025, and introduced Professor Gee-Kung (GK) Chang 張繼昆 , whom Robert also represented with colleague Brian Kelly . Rob said this is a critical time for the country and for the Asian American community. Although the China Initiative was officially ended, similar prosecutions are still occurring—particularly targeting professors, scientists, and professionals with ties to China. Rob explained that GK was accused of wire fraud based on allegations that he and a colleague from ZTE conspired to misuse J-1 visa students, supposedly having them work at ZTE while being paid by Georgia Tech. However, the defense pointed out that, even according to the government’s own account, the students were working at Georgia Tech. The indictment was fundamentally flawed—it failed to allege that the financial component was the actual object of the fraud. As a result, the court dismissed most of the charges, leaving only one remaining. That final charge—visa fraud—was also challenged. GK had no role in the visa application process, and Georgia Tech had never provided training on compliance or rules regarding foreign collaboration. Without knowledge or training, there could not have been intent to defraud. Eventually, the government dropped the last remaining charge. GK was fully exonerated after a four-year ordeal under the era of the China Initiative. GK's case highlights a broader issue: many professors were once encouraged to collaborate with China, only to later face prosecution as political attitudes shifted. These retroactive investigations have damaged careers and chilled academic collaboration, especially within the Asian American community. Professor GK Chang shared his personal account of a harrowing legal ordeal during the May 2025 APA Justice monthly meeting. Quoting his written statement titled "From Injustice to Integrity: A Journey Through Fire," GK told his story that "I stand before you today, not as a victim of injustice, but as a witness to the power of integrity, forged in the fiercest fires of adversity. My journey was never just about reclaiming my freedom — it was about turning pain into a higher purpose, one that lights the way for those still suffering injustice." GK was born in China in 1947, moved to Taiwan as a baby during the Chinese Civil War, and came to the U.S. in 1970 for graduate studies in physics. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of California, Riverside in 1976 and became a U.S. citizen in 1981. With 23 years of experience in industry—including leadership roles at Bell Labs, Bellcore, Telcordia, and OpNext—GK became a pioneer in optoelectronic integration and fiber-optic communications, holding over 50 patents. He received multiple awards, including the R&D 100 Award and the Bellcore President’s Award. In 2002, he joined Georgia Tech as an Eminent Scholar Chair Professor. There, he led major NSF-sponsored research on fiber-wireless networks that laid the foundation for 5G and 6G technologies. He advised 30 Ph.D. students, published over 500 papers, and earned Fellow honors from IEEE and the Optical Society of America. He was recognized as a distinguished alumnus of National Tsing Hua University and received Georgia Tech’s Distinguished Faculty Achievement Award. On March 24, 2021, GK’s life was changed forever when nine federal agents arrested him at home without warning, accusing him of conspiracy and wire fraud under the now-defunct “China Initiative.” Despite his clean record and decades of academic and industry contributions, he was publicly indicted without prior notice. Though released on a low bail, the arrest devastated his personal and professional life. The media portrayed him as guilty, his reputation collapsed, and colleagues and friends distanced themselves, leaving him isolated and emotionally shattered. Despite being wrongfully indicted, GK stood firm, relying on his values, family, and a few loyal allies. Through careful review of over a million pages of documents with his legal team of Rob Fisher and Brian Kelly, he uncovered major flaws in the case against him: factual inaccuracies, missing evidence, and prosecutorial misconduct. The charges lacked legal grounding and were based partly on the testimony of a disgruntled former student. The government misunderstood academic norms and pursued the case without proof of intent, fraud, or personal gain—revealing a deeply flawed and unjust prosecution. Faced with multiple plea offers, including one to plead guilty to a single misdemeanor, GK refused to admit guilt for a crime he did not commit. He chose to fight on despite financial strain. A pivotal moment came in August 2023, when a prosecutor admitted in court that GK had not gained any money from the alleged offenses—contradicting the indictment’s claims. This crucial fact had been withheld from the grand jury, exposing serious prosecutorial misconduct and strengthening his case for vindication. The case shifted dramatically after the court dismissed 9 of the 10 charges on March 1, 2024. Empowered by this decision, GK demanded a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment, confident of full vindication. However, the emotional strain took a serious toll: he suffered a heart attack in May 2024 and underwent emergency surgery. As he recovered, his focus turned not just to clearing his name, but reclaiming his dignity. The ordeal was nearing its end, but had already come at a profound personal cost. The final charge was dismissed on April 14, 2025, through a motion filed by the prosecutor and approved by the judge, fully exonerating GK without a trial. Yet, the long-awaited freedom brought no joy. After four years of legal battles, he was left emotionally scarred, physically worn, and financially depleted. Professionally, the damage was irreversible—four crucial years of innovation and contribution at the peak of his career were lost forever. Despite the pain, the ordeal brought GK clarity and a renewed sense of purpose. He emerged not only as a survivor but as a seeker—of truth, justice, and understanding. His faith in the justice system was shaken, as he came to see its vulnerability to error, bias, and ambition. He now believes that justice does not automatically protect the innocent and must be actively pursued with courage and conviction. Upholding what is right requires strength, even in the face of overwhelming adversity—because justice is never guaranteed, only earned. Quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. , GK concluded his statement by stating: "I share my testimony, 'A Journey Through Fire,' not for sympathy, but as a warning—and as a beacon. "To those suffering similar injustice: "You are not alone. "And by standing together, "we can help ensure that no one else must endure this tribulation again." References and Links 2025/05/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting: GK Chang and Robert Fisher (video 19:00 2025/05/05 Gee-Kung Chang: 20250505 GK Chang, A Journey Through Fire, revised July 19, 2025 .pdf Download PDF • 218KB 2025/04/15 Law360: Judge Ends 'China Initiative' Prosecution Of Ex-Ga. Tech Prof 2021/03/24 DOJ: Georgia Institute of Technology professor charged with Visa and wire fraud Previous Item Next Item

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