Go Go Prev Next The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is the principal federal law enforcement agency of the United States, operating under the jurisdiction of the Department of Justice (DOJ). Established in 1908, the mission of the FBI is to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution of the United States, including safeguarding the rights and liberties of all citizens. The FBI operates several branches including Intelligence, National Security, Criminal and Cyber, Science and Technology, and Information and Technology. With its headquarters in Washington, D.C., and 56 field offices across the nation, the FBI’s Fiscal Year 2023 budget was $11.3 billion with 37,000 authorized positions, 260 attorneys, and 13,600 agents. The FBI’s role and activities related to the China Initiative may arguably be traced to Director Christopher Wray’s testimony in a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on February 13, 2018, in which he targeted all students, scholars and scientists of Chinese origin as “non-traditional collectors” and a national security threat to the United States. Alarmed by the racial and ethnic profiling overtone, a coalition of organizations led by the Committee of 100 (C100) wrote to Director Wray on March 1, 2018, and requested a meeting to “engage in positive dialogue to advance our nation’s ideals as well as its national security.” On August 8, 2018, the FBI warned over 100 top leaders of Texas academic and medical institutions from the Texas Medical Center and across Texas about security threats from foreign adversaries as the first step in a new initiative the bureau planned to replicate around the country. In response to the reported FBI initiative, the Asian American community organized two educational events in Houston and at the United Chinese Americans National Convention in Washington, DC. Special agents from the FBI Houston and New York Field Offices participated in these events in September 2018, less than two months prior to DOJ’s launch of the China Initiative. A month after the launch of the China Initiative, a group of community leaders met with a senior-level FBI official and representatives at the FBI Headquarters to convey concerns raised within the Chinese American community about the role of bias in its investigations, among other issues. An attempt to establish a dialogue was largely unsuccessful as the discussions devolved into two separate monologues. Tensions between the U.S. and China intensified in July 2020 when the U.S. abruptly ordered China to close its consulate in Houston within 72 hours, accusing diplomats of aiding economic espionage and the attempted theft of scientific research, but gave few details to support the allegation. At the same time, DOJ filed charges against five scientists from China in five separate cases under the “China Initiative," alleging them to be part of China’s military. The FBI interviewed visa holders in more than 25 U.S. cities suspected of hiding their Chinese military memberships. A year later, all five visa fraud cases were dismissed. In Houston, FBI agents began to knock on doors to demand interviews with persons of Chinese descent, creating fear and anguish. The Chinese American community in Houston were deeply concerned about a witch hunt for spies by the FBI to use Chinese Americans as scapegoats to justify the political claim. A “Know Your Rights” webinar was organized to address the urgent question, "What to do if you are questioned by the FBI or police?" It was attended by over 830 participants. All the attorneys advised the community not to speak to the FBI as "nothing good will come out of it." Three months after the announced end of the China Initiative in February 2022, the FBI San Francisco Field Office hosted an Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) town hall meeting in downtown Oakland. Acknowledging the community’s concerns surrounding FBI national security investigations related to the People’s Republic of China, the purpose of the town hall meeting was to engage in an open and honest discussion about the FBI program, better understand the AANHPI community’s concerns, and exchange ideas on ways we can collectively work to address those concerns. The successful conclusion of the town hall meeting led to additional plans and activities at the local and national levels. The FBI San Francisco Field Office spoke at a roundtable in the 2023 C100 Annual Conference in San Jose, California. A C100 delegation visited Washington, DC, on September 28-29, 2023, including a 90-minute meeting with Jill Murphy, Deputy Assistant Director (DAD) of the Counterintelligence Division, and other FBI personnel at the FBI Headquarters. Jill Murphy was a featured speaker in a panel at the 2024 C100 Annual Conference in New York City. She spoke about some of the unintended negative consequences of U.S. national defense policies particularly those that have adversely affected the U.S. scientific and Chinese American communities. On June 6, 2024, Rice University’s Baker Center and Office of Innovation, Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition, and APA Justice co-hosted an unprecedented forum on “A Dialogue Between the Academic and Asian American Communities and the FBI.” The event was held in person at Rice University and also live streamed nationwide. While there is still significant progress that needs to be made to ensure that the U.S. is a welcoming environment that can attract and retain the best and brightest talents, the FBI acknowledged the negative impact that the China Initiative had made and is seeking to rebuild trust and continue a dialogue with the communities. “We’ve talked today about the implementation steps, the progress we can make. (This) could prove to be one of the most important events that ever occurred on campus, so I’m very appreciative for being a part of it,” said Neal Lane, senior fellow in science and technology policy at the Baker Institute and former director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. References and Links 2024 Department of Justice: FY2024 Federal Bureau of Investigation Budget Performance Summary Section II 2020/12/22 Department of Justice: Organization Chart of Federal Bureau of Investigation 2018/03/01 Committee of 100: Community Organizations Call for Meeting with FBI Director Christopher Wray Regarding Profiling of Students, Scholars, and Scientists with Chinese Origins 2018/02/13 U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: Hearing on Global Threats and National Security Overview Add paragraph text. Click “Edit Text” to customize this theme across your site. You can update and reuse text themes. Timeline Contents Select Title FBI & Law Enforcement WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME WELCOME

Newsletter - #326 Xiaofeng Wang; Dean Chemerinsky; F1 Students; TX HB17; NAPABA/AALDEF; Litigations; + #326 Xiaofeng Wang; Dean Chemerinsky; F1 Students; TX HB17; NAPABA/AALDEF; Litigations; + In This Issue #326 · Urgent : Professor Xiaofeng Wang's Wife to Speak at Town Hall/Sign-On Letter · Dean Erwin Chemerinsky Remarks at APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Lawsuits Filed for F1 Visa Students · Update on Texas Alien Land Bill HB17 · NAPABA and AADELF Filed Amicus Briefs on Birthright Citizenship · Latest on Litigations Against Trump's Executive Actions · News and Activities for the Communities Urgent : Professor Xiaofeng Wang's Wife to Speak at Town Hall/Sign-On Letter On April 11, 2025, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) announced that Nianli Ma , wife of Professor Xiaofeng Wang 王晓峰 , will join the virtual State of Play Town Hall to share the challenges that her family is facing. Register to attend the Town Hall: https://bit.ly/4jaA40N . Indiana University (IU) terminated Professor Wang's tenured position as Associate Dean for Research; James H. Rudy Professor of Computer Science, Engineering and Informatics; Director of Center for Security and Privacy in Informatics, Computing, and Engineering; and Director of Secure Computing on March 28. His wife's employement as IU Libraries analytst was also terminated on March 24.AASF has prepared a letter to Rahul Shrivastav , Provost of Indiana University: https://bit.ly/4jmKKJI . Concerned organizations and inidviduals are requested to sign on to the letter by 8 pm ET on Monday, April 14, 2025: https://bit.ly/3EqluTS .The AASF announcement states in part, "In this letter, we raise our concerns about whether this termination occurred without adherence to the University’s due process policies, including the requirement for notice and a hearing before the Faculty Board of Review, under University Policy ACA-52 . We request the reinstatement of Professor Wang and for IU to grant him his due process rights and the opportunity to defend himself."Moreover, we provide this letter to offer additional context from the Asian American and broader scholar, scientific, and research community. Professor Wang’s case has implications for the broader research community. There is a concern that scholars could receive backlash from their universities for activities that are not their own (i.e., getting in trouble for a grant that is not your own or a project you had no awareness of), and a question on whether scholars will be scapegoated and stripped of due process by universities for administrative errors and mistakes on paperwork as opposed to working together to fix any administrative errors. Oftentimes, scholars are not even making any intentional mistakes as those who are considered collaborators may not always be clearly defined. The criminalization of administrative matters and the scapegoating of individual academics will lead to a chilling environment for the research community and deter international collaborations that are so vital to our country’s competitiveness and prosperity."As concerns increase about the potential return of the DOJ’s China Initiative, we must make a stand as a community and ensure that the principles of due process and fairness are upheld."APA Justice is tracking Professor Wang's case at: https://bit.ly/42tbPVR Dean Erwin Chemerinsky Remarks at APA Justice Monthly Meeting Erwin Chemerinsky is Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law at University of California Berkeley Law School. He is a renowned constitutional scholar and a leading expert on civil rights, free speech, and the judiciary. In the first months of the Trump administration, he has been a vocal advocate for the rule of law. Dean Chemerinsky spoke at the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 7, 2025. · 2025/04/05 CNN: Law school dean on Trump's executive orders: 'This is just about retribution' · 2025/04/03 Washington Post Opinion: Trump is targeting law firms and academia. Why don’t they speak up? · 2025/03/14 AP News: Trump demands unprecedented control at Columbia, alarming scholars and speech groups · 2025/03/07 New York Times Opinion: The One Question That Really Matters: If Trump Defies the Courts, Then What? Dean Chemerinsky expressed deep concern about the future of American democracy, stating that if the country were to slide into authoritarianism, this is what it would look like. He emphasizes that his fears are nonpartisan and not about specific policies like tariffs or foreign affairs, but rather about blatant violations of the Constitution and rule of law. He believes the current administration has shown unprecedented lawlessness within its first 75 days, more than any administration before, and signals the urgency of collective action in response. Dean Chemerinsky covered six major topics: 1. Putting people in prison without any due process . Dean Chemerinsky describes a troubling case in which the Trump administration transferred over 200 Venezuelans—and mistakenly, a lawful Salvadoran resident named Kilmar Garcia —to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador without due process. Judge Patricia Millett criticized the action as lacking even "a gossamer of due process." The administration argues that no U.S. court has authority to review or intervene when individuals are detained in foreign countries. Although a U.S. District Court ordered Garcia's return, the Justice Department contends that only a writ of habeas corpus applies—something U.S. courts cannot issue for those held abroad. Dean Chemerinsky warns this stance could allow the government to detain anyone, even critics, outside the U.S. with no legal recourse, raising serious constitutional concerns. The Supreme Court was going to rule on an emergency motion to return Garcia to the U.S. 2. Elimination of Federal agencies and cutoff of Federal funds . Dean Chemerinsky criticizes the Trump administration for unilaterally abolishing federal agencies like USAID, the Department of Education, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau without Congressional approval, which he says is illegal since only Congress can do so via statute. He also highlights that the administration is unlawfully refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress, despite having no authority to do so. Dean Chemerinsky points out that courts during the Nixon era ruled such actions violated the separation of powers, and the 1974 Impoundment Control Act explicitly forbids presidents from withholding congressionally approved spending. 3. Firings of agency heads and civil service workers . Dean Chemerinsky highlights the firing of agency heads and civil service workers without just cause, despite federal laws protecting them. He notes that since 1935, the Supreme Court has upheld Congress's authority to limit the removal of officials in multi-member agencies. Despite this, Trump dismissed leaders from bodies like the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board. Just recently, the D.C. Circuit ruled in Harris v. Bessent (7–4) that these firings were unauthorized. 4. Effort to strip birthright citizenship . Dean Chemerinsky identifies a fourth legal violation: the Trump administration’s attempt to eliminate birthright citizenship. The first sentence of Section One of the 14th Amendment states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” The phrase “within the jurisdiction” excludes only limited cases, such as children born to foreign soldiers during an invasion. The Supreme Court affirmed this broad guarantee in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), holding that all individuals born on U.S. soil are citizens, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. Dean Chemerinsky emphasizes that no prior president had challenged this interpretation—until Trump issued an executive order declaring that only children born to U.S. citizens or green card holders would be considered citizens, directly contradicting over a century of settled constitutional law. 5. Targeting universities . The fifth legal violation identified by Dean Chemerinsky is the Trump administration’s targeting of universities by cutting federal funds—$400 million from Columbia and $150 million from the University of Pennsylvania—without following legal procedures. Federal law requires prior notice, a hearing, findings of fact, and a 30-day notice to Congress before cutting university funding, none of which occurred. Moreover, funds may only be cut if a university is deliberately indifferent to a hostile environment, and only the specific discriminatory program may be defunded—not the institution as a whole. Chemerinsky argues this effort is an unlawful attempt to intimidate universities. 6. Retribution against law firms . The Trump administration's targeting of law firms through punitive executive orders aimed at retribution. Firms like Covington & Burling and Perkins Coie were singled out due to their past associations—one had a lawyer who worked with Jack Smith , the other represented Hillary Clinton . The executive orders barred these firms and their lawyers from obtaining security clearances, entering federal buildings (including courts), or representing businesses contracting with the federal government—effectively crippling them. Three federal judges have ruled such orders illegal, affirming that lawyers should not be punished for their clients or lawful, zealous advocacy. Nonetheless, a number of law firms have capitulated and settled, trying to avoid being named in executive orders. Taken together, it is a pattern of violations of the Constitution and laws. Dean Chemerinsky outlines three key actions we all need to take: · Stay Informed – We must continue to follow the news and understand the actions of the Trump administration, despite it being upsetting. · Get Involved – Support organizations challenging lawlessness by volunteering and providing financial assistance. Everyone should find ways to contribute to upholding the rule of law. · Speak Out – Take action by contacting Congress, signing petitions, writing public op-ads, or simply discussing these issues with others to raise awareness and advocate for change. Dean Chemerinsky closed his remarks by quoting Reverend Martin Niemuller (1892-1984), who upon release from a concentration camp, wrote. “First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.“Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.“Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.“Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” Following Dean Chemerinsky’s remarks, a discussion including Drs. Les Wong and Jeremy Wu explored the implications of his warnings. Dr. Wong reflected on historical patterns of scapegoating and the importance of civic education, while Dr. Wu linked Dean Chemerinsky’s points to current threats targeting Asian American communities, such as the revival of the China Initiative and the use of wartime powers against immigrants. The discussion emphasized the need for vigilance, coalition-building, and active civic engagement to defend constitutional protection and uphold the rule of law.A video of Dean Chemerinsky's remarks is posted at https://bit.ly/42tYv2n (17:10)A summary of the April 2025 APA Justice monthly meeting is being prepared at this time. Update on the Case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia According to AP News , New York Times , Washington Post , and multiple media reports, on April 10, 2025, the Supreme Court in a 9-0 ruling rejected the Trump administration's appeal and instructed it to take steps to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant it had wrongly deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador.The Trump administration refused to meet District Court Judge Paula Xinis ’ deadline of April 10 to share steps officials are taking to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, saying in a court hearing that the government needs more time to comply with a Supreme Court order. The government’s attorney, Drew C. Ensign , said he could not answer the judge’s questions about Kilmar Abrego García’s whereabouts, including where the man is being held, what the government has done so far to secure his return and what it plans to do next.In a written order after the hearing on April 11, Judge Xinis said the Trump administration had “failed to comply” with the court’s instructions and would not answer “straightforward questions.” She ordered the Trump administration to file daily status updates with the court about the government’s progress getting Abrego García back to the United States by 5 p.m. each day and set a follow-up hearing for the afternoon of April 15.The Justice Department suspended Erez Reuveni , a veteran lawyer who acknowledged that Kilmar Abrego García was mistakenly deported and said he did not know the legal basis for the decision. Lawsuits Filed for F1 Visa Students On April 11, 2025, DeHeng Law Offices PC announced that it has filed a civil lawsuit with the District Court of the Northern District of California: Chen et al v. Noem et al (3:25-cv-03292) . According to the announcement 为留学生F1签证身份起诉美国政府的通知与捐款倡议书 , the US government is terminating hundreds if not thousands of international students' SEVIS registration without legitimate reasons. This has wreaked havoc on the students' study and life in the US. With the termination, the international students are supposed to leave the country right away. The only solution is to get a court order to restore their SEVIS status immediately. A website has been created to track the continuing development of the case: www.caseforf1students.com . A GoFundMe campaign has started at https://bit.ly/4js7lEB . Please share informaion with your colleagues, friends, and families in your network.On April 10, 2025, ACLU of Michigan announced that it had filed a federal lawsuit, Deore v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Secretary of (2:25-cv-11038) , on behalf of four international students attending Michigan schools whose student visa status was revoked. The lawsuit includes a request for an emergency injunction ; and asks the court to reinstate the legal status of the students so they can complete their studies in the United States. Update on Texas Alien Land Bill HB17 According to AsAmNews on April 10, 2025, the House Committee on Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs (Homeland Security Committee) in the Texas House of Representative has delayed a vote on one of the most stringent Alien Land Bills in the country as a coalition grows to oppose it. House Bill 17 (HB 17) would not only restrict the purchase of property by foreign nationals from China, North Korea, Russia and Iran, it would also put limits on where they could rent.Organizations like United Chinese Americans (UCA), APA Justice, the Association of American University Professors (AAUP), and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) are actively opposing the bill. Professor Steven Pei of APA Justice views the vote delay as a positive sign, indicating internal discussions and hesitations among lawmakers. HB 17 was removed from the Homeland Security Committee's agenda less than 24 hours before the scheduled vote on April 9. A substitute bill is anticipated, but details remain unclear. The Senate counterpart, SB 17, has already passed. Brian Evans , President of Texas AAUP-AFT, highlights that the bill could prevent students, faculty, and professionals from the targeted countries from residing near educational institutions and workplaces, effectively discriminating against these communities.Read the AsAmNews report: https://bit.ly/42rWDXY . 1. Statement by Rep. Ray Lopez Texas Representative Ray Lopez serves as Vice Chair of the Homeland Security Committee. According to his post on X on April 9, Rep. Lopez met with Asian Americans leaders from around the state to have a critical conversation about protecting civil rights in Texas. "We held an important virtual discussion on HB 17 and its dangerous implications. This bill doesn’t just raise national security concerns — it opens the door to racial discrimination, fear, and exclusion. From unchecked executive authority, criminal penalty without due process, and banning people from living in urban areas sets a troubling precedent. HB 17 sends a message that certain individuals are not welcome in Texas — and that’s unacceptable," 2. AAUP-ATF Calls for Action On April 8, 2025, Texas AAUP-AFT issued an urgent call to action in opposition to HB 17, which was recently heard by the Texas House Committee on Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs. The bill seeks to ban citizens from China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia from purchasing or leasing property within 10 miles of what the state defines as “critical infrastructure.” While supporters claim the bill is about national security, the AAUP-ATF and other critics argue that it is rooted in racial and ethnic profiling, echoing the discriminatory history of alien land laws that previously targeted Asian immigrants. HB 17, they warn, threatens the rights of individuals based solely on their national origin rather than any actual wrongdoing.The AAUP emphasizes that HB 17 poses a direct threat to the educational mission and values of Texas institutions, particularly by creating a hostile environment for international students, faculty, and researchers. These individuals contribute significantly to academic excellence, research innovation, and cultural diversity on campuses across the state. If passed, the bill could deter international talent from coming to Texas, damage collaborative academic relationships, and send a chilling message that people can be excluded from basic rights due to their nationality. The AAUP calls on Texans to contact their state representatives and speak out against HB 17, defending the rights of all members of the academic community and upholding the principles of equity and inclusion. 3. Local NAACP and LULAC Joined Rally During the March 30, 2025, Houston rally against HB 17, NAACP Houston President Bishop James Dixon delivered a powerful speech urging federal and state leaders to uphold America's promise of justice and equality for all Americans - including Chinese, Japanese, African, and Latino Americans. He condemned policies like HB 7 and SB 17 as betrayals of democratic principles, declaring “We’re not asking for pity—we’re asking for justice.” Bishop Dixon called for unified, sustained actions beyond press conferences to achieve read change. He ended with a rallying cry: “The people united can never be defeated” and led the crowd in singing of "We Shall Overcome."Houston LULAC Council President Dr. Sergio Lira and his wife Maria also joined the rally in solidarity. Speaking with passion and conviction, Dr. Lira declared, “When there is discrimination against one, there is discrimination against all. We must stand together.” He emphasized the importance of unity and collective action, vowing, “We are going to let folks in Austin and across the nation know that we are brothers and sisters, united in the spirit of ‘yes we can.’” 4. An Emerging Broad and Diverse Coalition More than 80 organizations signed an open letter to Texas legislators opposing HB 17. The effort was led by The Texas Multicultural Aadvocacy Coalition (TMAC) and UCA, which was also posted as ads in Texas media. They represent a broad, diverse coalition of Texas-based and national groups united against discriminatory legislation targeting immigrants and communities of color.The 49 Texas organizations include cultural, civic, business, legal, and advocacy groups rooted in Asian American, Latino, and African American communities across major cities such as Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio. These groups range from long-established institutions like the NAACP Houston Branch, Greater Houston LULAC Council, and OCA Greater Houston, to professional networks like the Asian American Bar Associations of Houston, Dallas, and Austin, as well as local cultural organizations such as the DFW Chinese Alliance, Shaanxi Folks Group, and Fujian Association of South USA. Together, they reflect a rich diversity of Chinese, Asian, and multicultural constituencies across Texas, voicing collective opposition to HB 17's targeting of foreign land ownership based on national origin.The 32 national and other organizations include leading civil rights, legal, and policy groups such as Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC, APA Justice Task Force, Asian Pacific American Public Affairs, Chinese American Citizens Alliance, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA), and OCA–Asian Pacific American Advocates. They are joined by grassroots networks like Pivot to Peace, Stop AAPI Hate, and United Chinese Americans (UCA), as well as academic and professional associations such as the Federation of Asian Professor Associations. These groups bring national visibility, legal expertise, and historical context to the fight against policies like HB 17, drawing parallels to past discriminatory land laws and mobilizing communities across the country in defense of civil rights and equal treatment under the law.The Asian Real Estate Association of America (AREAA) and its San Antonio Chapter were also a key voice in the real estate and property rights sector, advocating against discriminatory barriers that would impact their members and clients at the state and national level.2025/04/10 西雅图中文电台: 德州众议院推迟限制华人租房/购房法案的投票 2025/04/08 休斯顿在线: 限制中国人买房/买地/租房的德州HB17法案明日投票！留给我们的时间不多了 NAPABA and AADELF Filed Amicus Briefs on Birthright Citizenship On April 11, 2025, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF)—with the Korematsu Center for Law and Equality and the Center for Civil Rights and Critical Justice—filed an amicus brief in opposition to the Trump administration’s executive order terminating birthright citizenship for children born to parents who are not citizens or permanent residents. The brief was submitted on behalf of more than 80 Asian American organizations and law centers to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The brief connects the executive order to its historical roots in the Asian exclusion movement of the late 19th century, arguing that this attack on birthright citizenship has no place in a democracy founded on the notion that all people are created equal. The authors center the stories of mixed-status families and additional instances of individuals who had their citizenship taken away to illustrate the harm the executive order will have if allowed to stand. Read the AALDEF announcement: https://bit.ly/42biaVZ . Read the full amicus brief: https://bit.ly/42FSscd .On April 9, 2025, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) and 43 of its affiliates and national associates from across the country joined forces to defend the fundamental constitutional guarantee of citizenship. The coalition filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in State of Washington v. Donald J. Trump. The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution promises every person equal treatment under the law. It also includes an equal claim of citizenship to all persons born in the United States, regardless of the stature or circumstances of their parents.Executive Order 14160 upends that promise. It refuses to recognize the birthright citizenship of any child born in the United States to a mother who is lawfully present on a temporary basis, like those on work or student visas, and a father who is neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident.Read the NAPABA announcement: https://bit.ly/3G6WotN . Read the full amicus brief: https://bit.ly/4csfFln Latest on Litigations Against Trump's Executive Actions As of April 11, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trump 's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 186 (4 closed cases). These are some of the latest developments: · J.A.V. v. Trump (1:25-cv-00072) @Southern District of Texas and G.F.F. v. Trump (1:25-cv-02886) @Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs are Venezuelan nationals (proceeding under pseudonym) in immigration custody in Texas and New York respectively. They have filed habeas petitions asking the court to stop the government from removing them from the United States based on the Alien Enemies Act Presidential Proclamation, and to declare the Proclamation unlawful. The case has been brought on behalf of themselves and a class of all other persons similarly situated, to include all noncitizens from Venezuela in immigration custody in the Southern District of Texas and the Southern District of New York, who were, are, or will be subject to the Proclamation. The courts have temporarily blocked the Defendants from removing the Plaintiffs and others similarly situated through April 23, 2025. · Samuels v. Trump (1:25-cv-01069) @District of Columbia. On January 27, 2025, President Donald Trump removed Plaintiff Jocelyn Samuels from her position as Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Samuels brought suit arguing that the EEOC is an independent agency, and President Trump does not have authority to remove her prior to the end of her term in 2026. Samuels asked the court to declare her removal unlawful and for injunctive relief to allow her to perform her duties as Commissioner. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar 2025/04/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/14 State of Play Virtual Town Hall2025/04/15 China Connections: A Conversation with Emily Feng2025/04/22 Scholars Not Spies: Fighting for International Academic Workers’ Rights in an Era of Rising US-China Conflict2025/04/24 CHINA Town Hall: The First 100 Days: President Trump's China Policy2025/04/24-26 Committee of 100 Annual Conference and Gala2025/04/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/05/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/05/06 Asian American Careers - How to Build Your Personal Network, including Through Strategic Allies2025/05/11 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the new APA Justice website under development at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF April 13, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #198 8/7 Meeting; Fear Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership; China Initiative Legacy #198 8/7 Meeting; Fear Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership; China Initiative Legacy In This Issue #198 2023/08/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting "Can we move?" - Chinese Residents Fearful Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership Axed China Initiative’s Racial Profiling Legacy Haunts Scientists in US 2023/08/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, August 7, 2023, starting at 1:55 pm ET. In addition to updates by Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC); John Yang 杨重远 , President and Executive Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC; and Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), speakers will include: Clay Zhu 朱可亮 , Partner, DeHeng Law Offices 德恒律师事务所; Founder, Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance 华美维权同盟, to report on the latest developments of the lawsuit against Florida's discriminatory alien land law Echo King 金美声 , President, Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA), to provide on-the-ground reports about the July 18 court hearing, press conference, and protests in Tallahassee; and a report by Jenny Liu 刘洁 , President, Yick Wo Institution 益和学会 Cynthia Choi , Co-Executive Director, and Shanti Prasad , Advocacy Manager, Chinese for Affirmative Action (CAA), to give a brief introduction of CAA and its recent roles and activities in alien land laws, warrantless surveillance/reauthorization of Section 702, anti-Asian hate, and related topics Christine Chen , Executive Director, APIAVote, to give a brief introduction of APIAVote, observations on the communities' reaction to the alien land bills/laws, introduction of laws in some states criminalizing those who assist voters (AP report: https://bit.ly/3NM9z3s ), and APIAVote plans for the upcoming 2024 elections The virtual monthly meeting is by invitation only. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Steven Pei 白先慎 , Vincent Wang 王文奎 , and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org "Can we move?" - Chinese Residents Fearful Over New US Laws Banning Property Ownership According to the Guardian on July 26, 2023, a Florida law barring certain foreign nationals from buying property has brought confusion, thoughts of moving and protests. Earlier this year, Fort Lauderdale resident Yulin Wu ’s white co-workers told her not to worry about a Florida bill that would prohibit some Chinese people and entities from acquiring real estate. She had heard about the proposed legislation on Chinese-language social media.On May 8, Governor Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill (SB) 264 into law, a measure that bars almost all property ownership for people or entities from various “countries of concern” including China, Cuba, North Korea and Russia. Under the law, they cannot buy property with some exceptions; individuals who hold a non-tourist visa or have been granted asylum can buy a residence of less than 2 acres (0.8 hectares) if it is at least 5 miles (8 km) away from a military base or “critical infrastructure”. The law singles out Chinese people with higher penalties for violation, but it does not apply to those who are naturalized US citizens or who have legal permanent “green card” residency.Wu said: “I don’t understand why this law passed. It definitely changed my feelings about Florida and the United States. I’m not welcome here.”That sentiment is echoed by many Chinese residents in the US as laws banning foreign property purchases, most targeting Chinese people, have proliferated around the nation. According to the advocacy group APA Justice , 33 states have proposed or enacted similar bans against ownership of real estate by people of specific national origins. As legislators have revised their bills to address arguments that they are bigoted, some have added exceptions for lawful permanent residents who hold green cards.Many Chinese residents in the United States, like Wu, are alarmed by this latest anti-Chinese development, and some are becoming activists.Wu, the first in her family to attend college, spoke to the Guardian via phone while visiting New York City. She’s now mulling a move there. Wu settled in Florida just two years ago, passed the bar exam and landed a job. Wu bought a townhome as an investment property just before Florida’s SB 264 was passed, and she wonders now whether she will be forced to sell it. The land of anyone who buys or sells property in violation of the law could be seized by the government. Wu’s townhome is located near an airport, and she’s unsure whether such an area is off-limits under the law. Gabriel Chin , a law professor at the University of California, Davis, said this latest trend follows a long history of “alien land laws”. Florida’s alien land law was only repealed in 2018, making it the last state to do so. Chin led his students in an effort to undo similar laws that remained on the books.At a July 18 court hearing in which a judge considered blocking the law, Chinese Americans demonstrated , some traveling from around the country. Zhengfei Guan is a University of Florida professor who has organized protests against the new law. He immigrated to the US in 2006. He noted that recently, “My daughter was asking, ‘Can we move?’” The 17-year-old, who is a US citizen, fears the increasingly hostile environment for people of Asian descent.He and Wu, the Fort Lauderdale lawyer, see the Florida measure as one component of the Chinese-US conflict, along with a trade war, accusations about the origins of Covid and violent attacks on Asian people. According to Guan, he and fellow Chinese academics have been adversely affected by China-fighting rhetoric and professional discrimination through the US justice department’s “China Initiative”. Discontinued last year, that federal effort investigated researchers under the theory that spies in unconventional places were sharing valuable intelligence data with Beijing. Even though Florida would allow Guan’s children, as citizens, to buy a house there, he perceives the property ban as part of a pattern of bias.This new batch of alien land laws has sparked confusion and thoughts of relocation, but also coalition building across the nation. Steven Pei , a Taiwanese immigrant and electrical engineering professor in Houston, flew to Tallahassee for last week’s court proceeding. Although naturalized, he observed: “Nobody can tell if I am a citizen or not. I have to prove it?”Pei credited Black politicians, especially US Representative Al Green of Texas, for key support in defeating that state’s version of an alien land law in May. Pei said: “He organized the major rallies here … and what really touched me is he has been meeting [ethnic] leaders every Saturday since March.” Green encouraged the formation of a new non-partisan Multicultural Advocacy Coalition that Pei said includes African Americans and Latinos alongside Asian Americans. Green himself said: “I’m concerned we not discriminate based on where you are from.” Recalling segregated facilities and having to step off the sidewalk if a white person were approaching during Jim Crow, he added: “I was unfortunate enough to be born a son of the segregated south. I know what discrimination is like. There are many things I lived through I would not want us to return to.”Read The Guardian report: https://bit.ly/3qf8itW . U.S. Senate Approves Amendment to FY2024 National Defense Authorization Act. According to Forbes and other media reports, the Senate voted 91-7 on July 25, 2023, to prevent China, Russia, North Korea and Iran from purchasing U.S. farmland—part of a bipartisan push to scrutinize adversaries’ business dealings in the United States. The proposed rule—passed as an amendment to the annual defense budget bill—would require the president to review farmland transactions from those four countries, and block any deals that would give a foreign entity from any of the countries “control” of U.S. farmland and waive those that don’t.The measure would also give the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, commonly known as CFIUS, the power to evaluate land deals, using data from the Department of Agriculture, and block those deals if it sees fit (CFIUS already evaluates other transactions with foreign actors).Prior to this amendment being attached, the bill was narrowly passed by the Republican-led House earlier this month, but that version included a number of conservative priorities related to abortion, transgender care and other hot-button issues that are unlikely to be accepted by the Democrat-controlled Senate. The Senate bill will return to the House for debate and a vote with the new amendments.Read the Forbes report: https://bit.ly/3DwWoPn After the Senate vote, Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) provided a v ote explanation , which says in part: "As written, the language [of Rounds amendment No. 813 to S. 2226, the FY24 National Defense Authorization Act] seems to equate individuals from the specified countries as synonymous with their governments. Under this provision, if an individual with a valid visa, who has no connection to one of the governments listed, seeks to buy agricultural property above a certain threshold, the U.S. Government would deny them the ability to proceed with the purchase simply because of their national origin. While the national security concerns this amendment seeks to address are real, we must not discriminate on individuals based on national origin, race, or ethnicity. I voted in favor of my colleagues' amendment in order to continue the conversation on this important issue, but will not support any final provision that does not resolve these civil liberties concerns." Axed China Initiative’s Racial Profiling Legacy Haunts Scientists in US According to the South China Morning Post on July 25, 2023, physicist Xiaoxing Xi ’s life changed forever when a team of armed FBI agents burst into his home in Philadelphia and rounded up his family at gunpoint.Xi was arrested and charged with sharing sensitive US company technology on May 21, 2015 – three years before the Donald Trump administration launched its controversial China Initiative targeting scientists in the US for perceived connections with Beijing.The charges against Xi – who was accused of trying to transfer information to China about the design of a pocket heater – were dropped four months later, but not before he lost his position as chairman of the physics department at the Philadelphia-based Temple University. During the FBI’s investigation, Xi was also not allowed to appear on campus, apply for research grants or talk to his students, even privately.“That’s a very traumatic experience,” Xi said the US government’s case was based on four emails sent from his Temple University address that had nothing to do with the pocket heater.Xi’s ordeal took place under former president Barack Obama , but the Trump administration’s initiative vastly broadened the scope of later investigations into scientists of Chinese heritage in the US.About 150 academic scientists were openly investigated and two dozen hit with criminal charges before the initiative was eliminated by the justice department in February 2022. But the scrutiny has never stopped and there is little sign that the Joe Biden administration is doing enough to repair the damage, scientists of Chinese heritage have told researchers.The China Initiative, touted as a response to “economic espionage” by Beijing, was heavily criticized at the time as “unconstitutional” by the American Civil Liberties Union, which said it was based on racial profiling because it “singled out scientists based on their race, ethnicity or national origin”.A lasting impact of the initiative is the widespread fear still reported by many scientists with Chinese heritage, according to a study by researchers from Princeton University, Harvard, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).The study, published last month in the National Academy of Sciences peer-reviewed journal PNAS, found general feelings of fear and anxiety had led many of the scientists to consider leaving the US or refrain from applying for federal grants. Before he became a target for the FBI, Xi’s research was funded by nine federal grants and he had 15 people on his team. Today, Xi receives one grant for a much smaller focus of study, with just one researcher to help him.MIT mechanical engineering professor Gang Chen – who was arrested in January 2021 under the China Initiative and had his charges dismissed one year later – said he was afraid to apply for federal grants because of anxieties around being racially profiled.“Basically, I’m done with federal funding,” Chen told NBC Asian America in August. He has also shifted from nanotechnologies with obvious commercial applications to more fundamental research, according to the February edition of Nature .Another study, published in March by The Review of Higher Education , found a “consistent and statistically significant pattern” of racial profiling of Chinese and other Asian scientists.The researchers – from the University of Arizona and Committee of 100, a Chinese-American non-profit – surveyed about 2,000 scientists from the top US research universities and concluded that concerns about racial profiling remained, despite the end of the China Initiative.Lead author Jenny Lee said there was no sign of “any governmental action to undo the harmful effects” of the China Initiative.One Chinese-American scientist who recently returned to China, because of the initiative’s impact, said the aim of the initiative had been to create fear among scientists, as part of a US effort to contain China’s scientific progress.“[The US] has achieved its purpose. US-based scientists are coming back to China and those in China are afraid to go back to the US,” said the scientist, who requested anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity. “It’s happening every day.”But some experts argue that cutting off relations with Chinese academia undermines Washington’s intention of competing and winning a technology race against Beijing. Junming Huang , an associate research scholar at Princeton University and co-author of the PNAS study, said the US should “continue to welcome and attract Chinese scientists to maintain [its] global leadership in science and technology in the long run”.“A key lesson we can learn from the China Initiative is we cannot apply a broad brush to solve problems and apply policies. We need surgical precision and data-based solutions that offer genuine steps moving forward to tackle specific problems,” he said.Despite the challenges reported by scientists of Chinese heritage in the US, not everyone is returning to China.Meanwhile, Xi’s efforts to seek redress from the courts for his experience continues. A lawsuit filed against the lead FBI agent and others in 2017, alleging that they “made knowingly or recklessly false statements” to support their investigation and prosecution was dismissed by a district court in 2021.Xi appealed the decision last year and in May the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled his case had been wrongfully dismissed. Xi and his family are waiting to see if the US government will appeal the ruling and move the case forward, he said. In written testimony presented in 2021, Xi said that “whether the US and China are in a cold war or hot war, it is wrong for law enforcement to profile Chinese scientists based on where they come from”.“All Chinese professors, scientists and students are not non-traditional collectors, or spies, for China,” he said.Speaking to the South China Morning Post last week, Xi said the China Initiative had been based on the assumption that Chinese scientists were “suspected of spying for China”. “That’s the fundamental reason for all these cases and all the investigations that have happened … In a sense, ‘presumed guilty until proven innocent’. This condition has not changed,” he said. Read the South China Morning Post report: https://bit.ly/3rCJixk Back View PDF July 31, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #251 5/6 Monthly Meeting; Rally Against FL SB846; FISA in 2 Years; AANHPI Heritage Month; + #251 5/6 Monthly Meeting; Rally Against FL SB846; FISA in 2 Years; AANHPI Heritage Month; + In This Issue #251 • 2024/05/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting • Organizer Report on Florida Rally Against SB 846 • Expanded FISA Authorized for Two Years • May is Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month • News and Activities for the Communities 2024/05/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, May 6, 2024, starting at 1:55 pm ET. In addition to updates by Nisha Ramachandran, Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC); Joanna YangQing Derman, Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC; and Gisela Perez Kusakawa, Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), Two speakers will describe an upcoming forum with the Asian American and academic communities and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) in Houston, which will be co-hosted by TMAC and the Science and Technology Policy Program, Baker Institute for Public Policy, Office of Innovation at Rice University. • Nabila Mansoor, President, Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition (TMAC); Executive Director, Rise AAPI • Kenneth M. Evans, Scholar in Science and Technology Policy, Baker Institute for Public Policy, Rice University In addition, • Rebecca Keiser, Chief of Research Security Strategy and Policy, National Science Foundation (NSF), returns to update us on the JASON report on Safeguarding the Research Enterprise, MacroPolo's Global AI Talent Tracker 2.0, and related activities and development at NSF. 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 . Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition The Texas Multicultural Advocacy Coalition (TMAC) is a coalition of multicultural groups in Houston that is dedicated to promoting justice and progress for marginalized communities. Comprising a diverse range of organizations, the coalition works to raise awareness about issues affecting communities of color, advocate for policy changes, and promote collective action to achieve greater equity and social justice. By bringing together different communities and organizations, TMAC aims to create a more inclusive and equitable society for all. Baker Institute for Public Policy, Office of Innovation, at Rice University The Science and Technology Policy Program, Baker Institute for Public Policy, Office of Innovation at Rice University provides a space for policymakers and scientists to engage in substantive dialogue on critical scientific issues facing the U.S. and the world. Through this program, scholars address a broad range of policy issues that affect scientists and their research, as well as the application of science for the public good. Organizer Report on Florida Rally Against SB 846 During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 8, 2024, Professors Jiangeng Xue 薛剑耿, Zhong-Ren Peng 彭仲仁, and Chenglong Li 李成龙 reported on their organization and observations of the rally against a state law known as SB 846 in Gainesville on March 26, 2024. Professor Xue, Peng, and Li are President, Board Member, and President-elect of the Florida Chinese Faculty Association (FCFA) respectively. FCFA was created about 10 years ago with the original goals of developing collaborations among the faculty members and mentoring the younger members. National and local media including NBC News, AsAmNews, WUFT, and Alligator had wide coverage of the rally. Professor Xue began by outlining the history and current challenges faced by FCFA, emphasizing their shift towards addressing campus influences. During the China Initiative, FCFA met with the provost, the vice president for research, and the president and talked about issues of concern such as compliance and outside activity reports that led to some regulations that may be less intrusive. The SB 846 bill came out of the 2023 legislative session to target academic exchange and collaborations. Despite assurance about SB 846 that students would not be affected, the Board of Governors – the governing body for all state universities in Florida – put out more restrictions including those on hiring graduate students and scholars in October 2023. This has become the focal point of the FCFA fight, prompting FCFA's response, including a rally and media engagement with help from national and local organizations such as the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF). Over 200 participants, including faculty, students, and national organization representatives, joined the rally, raising awareness and advocating for academic freedom and non-discriminatory hiring practices. FCFA expressed gratitude for the support received, including the Graduate Assistants United, AASF, Advancing Justice | AAJC, APA Justice, UCA, ACLU Florida, and the Brennan Center. FCFA outlined three key requests: restoring faculty hiring rights, upholding academic freedom, and depoliticizing education. Positive outcomes included media attention and strengthened connections between local and national groups. Though direct feedback from the Board of Directors was limited, FCFA remains optimistic about potential amendments. Professor Peng highlighted the establishment of a supportive relationship with the faculty union and participation in a public comment session at the Board of Governors meeting. Professor Li emphasized the importance of national support, a well-structured platform, and individual responsibilities in achieving a successful rally. A summary for the April APA Justice monthly meeting has been posted at. https://bit.ly/3vVMsif . We thank these speakers for their reports and updates: • Nisha Ramachandran, Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, nisha.ramachandran@mail.house.gov • Joanna YangQing Derman, Director, Anti-Profiling, Civil Rights & National Security Program, Advancing Justice | AAJC • Gisela Perez Kusakawa, Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), gpkusakawa@aasforum.org • Professors Jiangeng Xue, Zhong-Ren Peng, and Chenglong Li, Florida Chinese Faculty Association (FCFA) • Robert Underwood, Commissioner, President's Advisory Commission on AA and NHPI; Former Chair, CAPAC; Former President, University of Guam • Yvonne Lee, Commissioner, USDA Equity Commission David Inoue, Executive Director, Japanese American Citizens League, was not able to join the meeting. Expanded FISA Authorized for Two Years Authority of The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was expanded and extended for two years under the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act. This is the text for P.L. 118-49: https://bit.ly/3WbyNOH According to Forbes on April 24, 2024, more than 10 years have passed since Edward Snowden revealed the worst surveillance scandal of the FBI and the NSA in U.S. history. His revelations sparked a vivid discussion—one that can be looked at with more precision now that the heated debate that started one decade ago has settled for the next two years: How can we balance the security and privacy requirements of our modern societies? Snowden brought some of the most intrusive surveillance programs of U.S. authorities to light, the most prominent ones being PRISM, XKeyscore and Boundless Informant. Once the public started to understand how much of their private data they willingly share online is being siphoned off, analyzed and scanned, the question arose whether this form of surveillance is required to keep citizens safe or violate citizens' privacy rights without measurable benefit. Regarding the Snowden leaks, there is only one solution to balancing security and privacy requirements: Privacy rights are indisputable. Governments and authorities must (and can) find ways to combat terrorists and other threats to national security with targeted surveillance measures—not by monitoring the entire population of a country. If we submit to general mass surveillance out of false fears of terrorists, we give up not just our privacy but also our freedom. 100% security is never possible—whether we allow mass surveillance or not. But the best possible security can only be achieved with maximum privacy because the encryption that makes our online life private also protects us from terrorists, such as malicious attackers on the web, as well as state-sponsored surveillance by autocratic countries. Read the Forbes report: https://bit.ly/49ZUWT7 May is Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month Asian Pacific American Heritage Month originated in June 1977 when Representatives Frank Horton (New York) and Norman Y. Mineta (California) called for the establishment of Asian/Pacific Heritage Week. Hawaii senators Daniel Inouye and Spark Matsunaga introduced a similar bill in the Senate. Both bills passed, and in 1978 President Jimmy Carter signed the resolution. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush expanded the celebration from a week to a month. Asian Pacific American Heritage Month is celebrated to commemorate the arrival in May 1843 of the first Japanese immigrants to the United States and the role of Chinese laborers in the completion of the first transcontinental railroad on May 10, 1869. We celebrate the contributions that generations of AANHPIs have made to American history, society, and culture. This year's theme set by the White House Initiative on Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders and the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center is "Bridging Histories, Shaping Our Future." The Census Bureau produces these facts about the AANHPI populations in 2024: https://bit.ly/3ITFME7 . Here is a sampling of activities across the country: • Chicago • East Bay Regional Park • Houston • Library of Congress • New York City arts and culture • Orlando • Philadelphia • Seattle • U.S. Government News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2024/04/30 Understanding Implicit Bias and How to Combat It 2024/05/02 AAGEN 2024 Executive Leadership Workshop 2024/05/04 Corky Lee's Asian America: Fifty Years of Photographic Justice Book Tour 2024/05/05 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting 2024/05/06 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2024/05/13-14 2024 APAICS Legislative Leadership Summit 2024/05/14 Serica Initiative: 7th Annual Women's Gala dinner Visit https://bit.ly/45KGyga for event details. 2. Heritage, Culture, and Community: The Future of America's Chinatowns WHAT: Heritage, Culture, and Community: The Future of America's Chinatowns WHEN: May 22, 2024, 5:00 pm ET WHERE: Hybrid event; 901 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20001 HOST: US-China Education Trust Moderator: Jen Lin-Liu, author Panelists: • Grace Young, cookbook author, culinary historian, and activist • Di Gao, senior director of research and development, National Trust for Historic Preservation • Penny Lee, documentary producer, director, and film editor DESCRIPTION: The panel will examine the importance and preservation of America’s Chinatowns today and delve into DC Chinatown and Chinese food’s unique and evolving role in the nation’s capital. REGISTRATION: To be announced Back View PDF April 29, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #92 Franklin Tao Trial; Chronicle Report on UTK/MIT; 11/01 Meeting; Events + Developments #92 Franklin Tao Trial; Chronicle Report on UTK/MIT; 11/01 Meeting; Events + Developments Back View PDF October 28, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #145 AAU Meeting; 9/12 Monthly Meeting; NSF Request for Comment; Prof Xi's Appeal; FOIA #145 AAU Meeting; 9/12 Monthly Meeting; NSF Request for Comment; Prof Xi's Appeal; FOIA Back View PDF September 15, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #390 Eric Zheng, Susan Thornton, Susan Shirk at 04/06 Meeting; Birthright Citizenship; More #390 Eric Zheng, Susan Thornton, Susan Shirk at 04/06 Meeting; Birthright Citizenship; More In This Issue #390 · Remarks by Eric Zheng and Video · Remarks by Susan Thornton and Video · Remarks by Susan Shirk and Video · More on Birthright Citizenship · News and Activities for the Communities Remarks by Eric Zheng and Video During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 6, 2026, Eric Zheng , President of The American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai (AmCham Shanghai 上海美国商会), shared his on-the-ground perspective on the opportunities and challenges facing American companies in China, set against a backdrop of evolving U.S.-China relations. Prior to his current role with AmCham Shanghai, Eric had a successful career with AIG including serving as President & CEO of AIG China. Eric has been active in several non-profit and charity organizations. He is a member of Committee of 100 and currently serves as Chair of Committee of 100 Greater China Region. Eric began by noting that 2026 is a consequential year for bilateral ties, with anticipated high-level visits between the United States and China. Within this context, he highlighted the role of AmCham Shanghai as a longstanding institution supporting commercial engagement and mutual understanding between the two countries. Eric briefly traced the organization’s history, noting that AmCham Shanghai was originally founded in 1915, reflecting an early American business presence in China. It ceased operations in 1950 following the founding of the People’s Republic of China, and was reestablished in 1987 after China reopened to the global economy. Today, it represents approximately 1,000 multinational companies, primarily U.S.-headquartered firms, making it one of the largest American chambers of commerce in the Asia-Pacific region. Turning to the economic relationship, Eric emphasized the scale and depth of U.S.-China commercial ties. He cited roughly $421 billion in Chinese exports to the U.S. and $151 billion in U.S. exports to China, along with significant two-way investment flows. However, he underscored that this interdependence is increasingly challenged by policy volatility, particularly fluctuating tariff regimes. At one point, tariffs reached as high as 145% on Chinese goods, and although they have since declined, they remain elevated. As Eric observed, “when you run a company, you need some predictability… it’s really hard to plan for the long term” amid shifting policies. He identified three primary challenges facing American companies in China: · Geopolitical tensions , which he described as the “number one challenge,” creating uncertainty in both policy and business environments; · Rising domestic competition , with Chinese firms now highly innovative and competitive—“no longer copycats”—and in many areas outperforming multinational companies; · Economic slowdown , as China’s growth moderates and business expectations soften. Eric noted that American firms now see themselves leading mainly in product quality and development, while falling behind in areas such as speed to market, licensing, digital capabilities, and adoption of emerging technologies. Reflecting these pressures, business confidence has declined sharply, with only about 41% of companies expressing optimism about their five-year outlook in China—down significantly from historical levels near 80%. Despite these headwinds, Eric emphasized that China remains a critical market. He pointed to continued GDP growth of around 5%, a $19.6 trillion economy, and a rapidly expanding middle class projected to grow from 400 million to 800 million by 2035. He illustrated this scale by noting that China’s annual economic growth is “almost a trillion U.S. dollars,” effectively “recreating a Switzerland every year.” He explained that American companies remain engaged for two main reasons: to serve China’s large domestic market (“in China for China”) and to support global supply chains (“in China for global”). Eric concluded on a firm and pragmatic note, emphasizing that continued U.S. business engagement in China is not optional but strategically necessary. Despite geopolitical tensions and market challenges, he argued that disengagement would come at a significant cost to U.S. competitiveness, innovation, and global influence. Operating in China, he noted, is essential not only for accessing a critical market but also for learning from increasingly sophisticated competitors and staying at the forefront of global industry trends. In his view, the stakes extend beyond individual companies to broader national interests. A sustained U.S. commercial presence in China helps preserve economic linkages, supports mutual understanding, and ensures that American firms remain relevant in one of the world’s most important markets. As he underscored, maintaining this presence is ultimately “in the best interest of the United States”—not just as a matter of business, but as a matter of long-term strategic positioning in a competitive global landscape. A summary for the April 6 APA Justice meeting is being prepared. Watch a video of Eric’s remarks at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a03kPRXnU0 (15:14). For more information about AmCham Shanghai, visit https://www.amcham-shanghai.org/ Remarks by Susan Thornton and Video During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 6, 2026, Susan Thornton , Vice Chair of U.S. Heartland China Association (USHCA), remarked on USHCA’s work and its subnational and citizen diplomacy including education and other people-to-people exchanges with China. Susan is a retired senior U.S. diplomat with almost three decades of experience with the U.S. State Department in Eurasia and East Asia. She is currently a Senior Fellow and Visiting Lecturer in Law at the Yale Law School Paul Tsai China Center. She is also the director of the Forum on Asia-Pacific Security at the National Committee on American Foreign Policy and a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Susan highlighted her work with USHCA, which seeks to expand U.S.-China engagement beyond the coasts by focusing on the American heartland. The organization, chaired by former Missouri Governor Bob Holden , promotes connectivity in trade, education, and cultural exchange across “the 20-something states in the middle of the country” that often have less exposure to China-related opportunities and policy discussions. She described a range of initiatives, including agricultural cooperation, health system exchanges, and local government engagement. In agriculture, the group connects U.S. growers, researchers, and industry associations with Chinese counterparts to explore “the future of food systems,” and organizes events such as the annual U.S.-China Agricultural Roundtable in Henan Province. Educational exchanges are another priority, with programs that send American students—particularly from historically Black colleges and universities—to China, providing opportunities that “they would probably otherwise not have.” USHCA also promotes Chinese language learning and cultural education, reflecting concerns about a declining pipeline of U.S. China expertise. Susan emphasized the strategic importance of broadening national understanding of China, stating that “Americans will need to know more about China in the future, not less,” and that such knowledge “should not be overly concentrated on the two coasts.” She also highlighted local-level exchanges, including forums that bring together U.S. and Chinese municipal leaders to share experiences on issues like climate change, economic development, and public health. At the same time, she noted that this work has become increasingly difficult. Visa restrictions, travel uncertainties, and rising geopolitical tensions are complicating exchanges on both sides. She observed that “exchanges between the U.S. and China are becoming more fraught,” with students and scholars facing growing obstacles. Susan also pointed to a lack of clarity in U.S. policy, noting that agencies often operate without clear guidance, leading to actions that can appear “arbitrary” or “politicized.” She warned that China-related issues are increasingly “ripe for fear-mongering and weaponization” in the current political climate, including through state-level legislation. Despite these challenges, Susan stressed that the risks should not outweigh the benefits of engagement. She underscored that her organization takes a careful, independent approach, including not accepting funding from China, and remains committed to its mission. Concluding on a forward-looking note, she emphasized that engagement with China is not optional for the United States—particularly for the heartland—and expressed hope that upcoming high-level meetings could help reinforce the importance of sustained exchanges and mutual understanding. Watch a video of Susan’s remarks at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9LqzT_PcfY (8:29). For more information about the U.S. Heartland China Association, visit https://usheartlandchina.org/ Remarks by Susan Shirk and Video During the APA Justice monthly meeting on April 6, 2026, Susan Shirk , Research Professor; Director Emerita, 21st Century China Center, University of California (UC), San Diego, shared her insights into the current state of US-China relations, especially the upcoming Trump-Xi summit. As former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of East Asia and Pacific Affairs and lifetime experiences, she is one of the most influential experts working on U.S.-China relations and Chinese politics. She is also Director Emerita of the UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC). Susan offered a candid and notably pessimistic assessment of the upcoming U.S.–China leader engagement between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping . While she acknowledged that leader-level diplomacy can create openings—what Joseph Nye has called the “funnel of choice”—she stressed that success depends on intensive groundwork that is currently lacking. Drawing on her experience in the State Department, she noted that past progress came only after extensive staff-level negotiations: “Professionals… put in hours of diplomatic efforts… before the leaders meet,” allowing both sides to define priorities, understand each other, and prepare deliverables. These preparations, she emphasized, are essential to making summits productive rather than symbolic. Susan had initially hoped the spring meeting could launch a sustained diplomatic process, but now sees more limited prospects. At best, she expects continuity rather than breakthroughs—likely preserving the existing “Busan truce” on tariffs, export controls, and rare earths. There may be incremental progress on trade and investment, such as movement on Phase 1 commitments or narrowly scoped Chinese investment in the U.S. However, she sees little chance of progress on harder issues. Susan warned that failure to address national security and people-to-people exchanges—including academic, journalist, and student flows—would be “tragic” and potentially dangerous. Taiwan is a particular concern, noting the absence of a clear U.S. strategy, raising the risk of improvised decisions during leader talks that could undermine regional stability. Her strongest criticism focused on the lack of preparation, which she described bluntly as “really diplomatic malpractice.” She pointed to weakened U.S. interagency capacity, limited sub-cabinet engagement, and a hollowed-out policy process: “Almost nothing at the sub-cabinet level… the National Security Council Asia staff is thinned out to almost no one.” At the same time, decision-making has become highly centralized. “The U.S. system has become almost as centralized… as China’s,” Susan said, leaving officials uncertain about objectives and reluctant to act proactively. In summary, Susan believes the absence of serious diplomatic preparation severely limits the potential of upcoming leader meetings. At best, they may stabilize tensions; at worst, they risk unstructured, leader-driven outcomes that could increase strategic instability. Watch a video of Susan’s remarks at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAoe5F8EmfI (11:21). More on Birthright Citizenship According to the New York Times , while the Supreme Court hearing on birthright citizenship on April 1, 2026, anchored in United States v. Wong Kim Ark , it has also renewed attention to a broader body of lesser-known cases involving Asian immigrants that helped define U.S. immigration and constitutional law. While United States v. Wong Kim Ark affirmed that children born in the United States are citizens regardless of their parents’ nationality, the justices also referenced cases such as Yick Wo v. Hopkins, Fong Yue Ting v. United States, and United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind . Together, these cases reflect a period when U.S. immigration law was explicitly designed to exclude Asians. Beginning with the Chinese Exclusion Act, federal policy severely restricted Asian immigration and barred naturalization. In response, Chinese and other Asian communities organized extensive legal challenges—filing over 10,000 lawsuits—often supported by groups like the Chinese Consolidated Benevolent Association. These efforts were not only defensive but strategic, helping to establish enduring legal principles. As one historian explained: “High-quality U.S. citizen lawyers were hired to litigate cases large and small.” Some cases expanded rights. In Yick Wo, the Court ruled that a neutral law applied discriminatorily violated the Constitution, extending equal protection to noncitizens. Others reinforced federal power or racial exclusion. In Fong Yue Ting, the Court upheld broad deportation authority. In Thind and earlier in Ozawa v. United States, the Court denied citizenship based on shifting and often contradictory definitions of “whiteness,” even stripping citizenship retroactively. Although Congress later dismantled racial barriers—especially with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965—these earlier rulings remain foundational. Wong Kim Ark, in particular, continues to underpin modern interpretations of birthright citizenship. Today, Asian Americans are one of the fastest-growing populations in the United States, largely due to post-1965 immigration. Yet awareness of this legal history remains limited. Advocates warn that weakening birthright citizenship could have disproportionate consequences, even for lawful residents. The report also highlights a broader challenge: many Asian Americans are unfamiliar with the history of exclusion laws and civil rights struggles that shaped their status today. As one lawmaker observed after educating constituents about this past: “They had no idea.” The fight over birthright citizenship is not just about one case, but about a long legacy of Asian American legal challenges that helped define constitutional rights in the United States—making today’s debate both historically grounded and deeply consequential. Read the New York Times report: https://nyti.ms/4cdMPpn News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/04/14 Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes - Anla Cheng 2026/05/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2026/05/12-14 Celebrating 250 - Building America’s Future TogetherVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. APA Justice January Monthly Meeting Summary Posted Summary for the January 2026 APA Justice monthly meeting has been posted at https://bit.ly/4sqZPxV . 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) · Deborah Frankel , Counsel, Bloch & White LLP · Kyle Bigley , Associate, Bloch & White LLP · Baimadajie Angwang 昂旺 , former NYPD Officer · Paul Cheung 鄭文耀 , President, Committee of 100 · Hua Wang 王华 , Chair, United Chinese Americans · Haipei Shue 薛海培 , President, United Chinese Americans · Sharon Wong , National Chair, OCA National Center · Thu Nguyen , Executive Director, OCA National Center # # # 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 April 13, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #127 6/6 Meeting; ODNI Overdue Report; US-China Future/Past; Chinese Students; Census Data #127 6/6 Meeting; ODNI Overdue Report; US-China Future/Past; Chinese Students; Census Data Back View PDF May 30, 2022 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

​AAJC and Asian Law Caucus have submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for all records relating to the U.S. Customs & Border Protection enforcement, treatment, and denial of admissions of students with connections to China. August 10, 2020 On August 10, 2020, Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC and Asian Americans Advancing Justice | Asian Law Caucus submitted a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request for all records relating to the U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) enforcement, treatment, and denial of admissions of students with connections to China. "Hateful rhetoric from public leaders has created a climate of fear for Asians and Asian Americans living in the United States. Public statements by government officials against Chinese students have had a chilling effect on international students and scholars, particularly those from China seeking only to graduate and finish their studies," the FOIA says. "In 2018, the Department of Justice (DOJ) laid the general groundwork for a hawkish shift towards China when they announced the China Initiative. With this initiative, the DOJ began to see connections to China as a threat and increased its efforts to investigate and prosecute individuals with Chinese ancestry for alleged espionage. This was despite growing concerns from civil society about implicit bias, discrimination, and race & ethnicity based profiling." "Moreover, since 2019, we have seen reports of CBP denying admissions to Chinese students while providing little to no information for the reasons why... It is imperative that CBP provides our communities and the public with information on its decisions to refuse entry and admission to students connected to China. The public has a strong interest in getting this information considering the government’s potential targeting of individuals of Chinese or Asian descent based on their race or ethnicity." AAJC and Asian Law Caucus have submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for all records relating to the U.S. Customs & Border Protection enforcement, treatment, and denial of admissions of students with connections to China. Previous Next FOIA Request on Chinese and International Students

Perils of Warrantless Surveillance: The Case for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Reform 2023 FISA Section 702 Monday, June 26, 2023 The U.S. Constitution protects its people against unreasonable searches and seizures. However, under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. government engages in mass, warrantless surveillance of phone calls, text messages, emails, and other electronic communications between Americans and foreigners. Information collected under this law without a warrant can be used to prosecute and imprison people, even for crimes that have nothing to do with national security. Asian Americans, especially Chinese Americans and the immigrant and scientific communities, have been targeted for warrantless surveillance that led to wrongful and unjust prosecutions. They include Temple University Professor Xiaoxing Xi 郗小星 and possibly New York Police Department Officer Baimadajie Angwang 昂旺. The current authorization of Section 702 will expire on December 31, 2023. What should the Asian American and immigrant communities know about Section 1 702? If it is not sunset, what reforms will be needed? What are the next steps for the communities? 20230626 Section702Webinar.jpg Previous Item Next Item

Newsletter - #50 Government Data/Information; House/State Hearings; 04/05 Monthly Meeting; NASEM Summit #50 Government Data/Information; House/State Hearings; 04/05 Monthly Meeting; NASEM Summit Back View PDF March 22, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #180 5/1 Meeting; Preemption of Real Property Discrimination; Vincent Chin; Cato Report; + #180 5/1 Meeting; Preemption of Real Property Discrimination; Vincent Chin; Cato Report; + In This Issue #180 2023/05/01 APA Justice Monthly Meeting CAPAC Organizational Endorsement Form for Preemption of Real Property Discrimination Act Vincent Chin Institute Launched - Rhetoric Can Result in Harm and Even Murder Cato Institute: Abandoning the US, More Scientists Go to China Activities and News for the Communities 2023/05/01 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held on Monday, May 1, 2023, starting at 1:55 pm ET. Erika L. Moritsugu , Deputy Assistant to the President and Asian American and Pacific Islander Senior Liaison, will deliver a special video from the White House to start the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. Brenna Isman , Director of Academy Studies, National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), will provide a brief description of the history, mission, and purpose of NAPA, its "Grand Challenges" campaign for public administration, and its Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) efforts and commissioned studies. Paula Williams Madison , Paula Williams Madison, Former Print and TV Journalist, Retired NBCUniversal executive and GE Company Officer, Former Vice President of the Los Angeles Police Commission and owner of The Africa Channel, will provide a recap of the April 17 Roundtable and share the possible next steps for this important work that may have long-lasting impact to the AAPI community and the American society overall.Updates will be provided in the meeting by: Nisha Ramachandran , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC); John Yang 杨重远 , President and Executive Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC; and Gisela Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum.The virtual monthly meeting is by invitation only. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Steven Pei 白先慎 , Vincent Wang 王文奎 , and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . CAPAC Organizational Endorsement Form for Preemption of Real Property Discrimination Act The Preemption of Real Property Discrimination Act (draft) is sponsored by Rep. Al Green (TX-9) and co-led by Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Chair Rep. Judy Chu (CA-28). We kindly ask that all organizations who would like to endorse do so by filling out the form here no later than Friday, May 5, 12pm ET. This form is for ORGANIZATIONAL endorsement only.As you may be aware, there are state laws throughout the U.S. that place restrictions on the acquisition or possession of real property in those states by citizens of foreign nations. These laws are often driven by concerns over commercial interests or national security. However, recent legislation introduced in states like Texas, South Carolina, and others include a flat prohibition on the purchase or acquisition of real property by the citizens of a select number of countries – Russia, North Korea, Iran, and China.We have seen policies like this before in our nation’s history – in the 1800s, when anti-Chinese sentiment culminated in the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the creation of alien land laws, or during World War II when tensions with Japan led to the stripping of land ownership rights from Japanese immigrants and the incarceration of 120,000 Japanese Americans. By refusing individuals from these foreign countries basic property rights, these bills take an unacceptable step toward xenophobia, nationalism, and discrimination. Therefore, the Preemption of Real Property Discrimination Act would do exactly that – preempt at the federal level state laws that would seek to deny foreign citizens the right to acquire real property in the United States. Full text of the bill can be read here: https://bit.ly/3HjM8fG . Fill out the form to endorse the bill here: https://bit.ly/426n97q Please email Scott Bell ( scott.bell@mail.house.gov ), Nisha Ramachandran ( nisha.ramachandran@mail.house.gov ), and Casey Lee ( casey.lee@mail.house.gov ) if you have any questions. Six-City Rally to Protest Florida Senate Bill 264 and House 1355 On April 29, 2023, The Florida Asian American Justice Alliance (FAAJA) and a broad coalition of organizations led a state-wide rally to protest the Senate Bill 264 and House Bill 1355 in Gainesville, Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando, Tallahassee, and Tampa. According to a joint press release , these bills violate the United States Constitution, the Florida State Constitution, the Fair Housing Act, and federal and state regulations that protect civil liberties and equal rights for all immigrants. By preventing Asian and other immigrants from owning real property, these bills unfairly discriminate against a specific group of people based on their national origin.The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association and its regional affiliates issued a statement opposing the Florida bills , so did the United Chinese Americans . An online petition to End AAPI Hate and Discrimination in Florida has collected more than 27,000 signatures.At Orlando, WESH2-TV reported on the event; FCRTV佛州华语广播电视台 provided a livestreaming report (video 1:18:29). Snapshots from the rallies: Vincent Chin Institute Launched - Rhetoric Can Result in Harm and Even Murder According to NBC News on April 26, 2023, and Ethnic Media Services on April 28, 2023, the Vincent Chin Institute was launched on April 26, 2023, at a news conference at the Congressional Triangle in Washington, D.C. joined by Members of Congress Judy Chu , Grace Meng , Mark Takano , the Smithsonian Under Secretary for Education Monique Chism , the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center APAC Acting Director Yao-Fen You , and Helen Zia .The launch coincided with the release of the second edition of the Vincent Chin Legacy Guide which is available in Arabic , Bengali , Simplified Chinese , Traditional Chinese , and English . Additional versions in Korean, Spanish, and Vietnamese will reportedly become available. The Legacy Guide was co-written by Helen Zia, which provides further education about the history of anti-Asian discrimination and racism in the United States.Excerpts of the Vincent Chin Legacy Guide recommendations include: Be prepared for anti-Asian incidents Engage your campus, community, church, workplace employee resource groups, social clubs and the like to educate and increase awareness to combat hate toward any people Reach out to local businesses Be a courageous ally Call on national, state and local leaders Support solidarity movements Demand that your state include curriculum about Asian Americans at the K-12 levels Connect the dots. Know your own Asian American stories and those of other marginalized people in America Stay informed Amplify the voices and stories of historically marginalized communities In 1982, the horrific baseball bat beating death of Vincent Chin on the eve of his bachelor party, and the miscarriage of justice that allowed his two white killers to be freed without spending a night in jail, ignited the modern Asian American civil rights movement and built a multiracial, multicultural coalition united for equal justice and human dignity which stands as a landmark of American history.Over 40 years later, Vincent Chin's story remains starkly relevant— especially in an era of sharp anti-Asian racism and Sinophobia. At the time, the economic rivalry between the US and Japan triggered targeted hate against Asian Americans, and was a direct cause of Chin’s death. At the launch, speakers drew parallels between the circumstances of Chin’s death and the anti-Asian racism today that puts all Asian Americans at risk. They highlighted how Chinese Americans are scapegoated for the COVID-19 pandemic; face proposed discriminatory legislation, such as alien land laws and Trump’s "China Initiative;" and are routinely suspected of spying for China. Chu, the first Chinese American woman elected to congress, was also recently accused of being disloyal to the US by Texas Rep. Lance Gooden . These effects, though aimed at Chinese Americans, inevitably affect all Asian Americans. Chin, for instance, was killed in an era of anti-Japanese sentiment — despite being Chinese himself.Speakers contended that learning from the circumstances of Chin’s death is critical to prevent the same hate from threatening AAPI lives. Yet Chin’s story remains underdiscussed: It is rarely taught in schools, and the historical context surrounding it is often missing. Chu, for instance, frequently references Chin’s death when opposing anti-China rhetoric in Congress. Yet, she is consistently met with ignorance from other legislators on his story. "Each time we take on this fight… I talk about what happened to Vincent Chin. Some members of Congress are shocked because they never even heard of story,” said Chu. “Already, Asian Americans have been suffering three years of anti-Asian hate due to Trump calling Covid-19 ‘China virus’ and ‘kung flu,’” she said. “But now, the rhetoric and tension about the U.S.-China relationship comes on top of that, potentially escalating that violence. Today, the focus has shifted to extremists engaging in racial profiling of Chinese Americans.” “Today, over 40 years later, what we learned is that the rhetoric used around economic competition with Asian countries can result in harm and even murder of Asian Americans here at home,” Chu said. Read the Ethnic Media Services report at https://bit.ly/420wCNK . Read the NBC News report at https://nbcnews.to/42am6Ua . Visit the Vincent Chin Institute website at https://www.vincentchin.org/ Cato Institute: Abandoning the US, More Scientists Go to China According to the Cato Institute on April 11, 2023, The Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD)—an intergovernmental organization with 38 member countries—has published new data showing that the United States is losing the race for scientific talent to China and other countries. China’s strategy to recruit scientific researchers to work at China‐affiliated universities is working. In 2021, the United States lost published research scientists to other countries, while China gained more than 2,408 scientific authors. This was a remarkable turnaround from as recently as 2017 when the United States picked up 4,292 scientists and China picked up just 116. As Figure 1 shows, the rest of the OECD and China have both surpassed the United States for net inflow of scientific authors. The OECD data are not measuring the movement of non‐Chinese into China or non‐Americans into the United States. The OECD tracks inflows and outflows of published scientific researchers based on changes in institutional affiliation. If an author who was previously affiliated with a different country publishes another article in a new country, the new country will be credited as receiving a new research scientist. The OECD credits more Chinese scientists returning to China for the sudden reversal in Chinese and American inflows. This is a disturbing trend that started before the pandemic. In fact, it appears to coincide with the Trump administration’s “ China Initiative ”—more accurately titled the anti‐ Chinese initiative . Launched in November 2018, the Department of Justice’s campaign was supposed to combat the overblown threat of intellectual property theft and espionage. In reality, it involved repeatedly intimidating institutions that employed scientists of Chinese heritage and attempting malicious failed prosecutions of scientists who worked with institutions in China. U.S. Attorney Andrew E. Lelling has even admitted that the initiative that he helped lead “created a climate of fear among researchers” and now says, “You don’t want people to be scared of collaboration.” If Chinese scientists are afraid to work in the United States, that means that the United States will not benefit from their discoveries as much or as quickly as China will. Although the Justice Department claims to have shut down its “China Initiative,” Cato colleagues doubt that Chinese scientists will be free from unjust scrutiny going forward. The U.S. National Institutes of Health is still bragging about having caused the firings of more than 100 scientists and shutting down research by over 150 scientists— over 80 percent of whom identify as Asian . The administration continues to maintain contrary to evidence that Chinese industrial espionage—by scientists working in the United States—is a significant threat to the country. Universities and U.S. companies think the far greater threat is losing out on talented Chinese researchers. If the United States wants to deal a blow to the Chinese Communist Party, it should start by trying to fix the damage that it has done in the last few years and liberalize immigration from China . Read the Cato Institute blog: https://bit.ly/3AJ9w28 News and Activities for the Communities 1. U.S.-China Scholarly Exchange Initiative A new report by the CSIS Trustee Chair in Chinese Business and Economics recounts a groundbreaking U.S.-China scholarly exchange initiative that occurred during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. Trustee Chair Scott Kennedy and Professor Wang Jisi of Peking University, founding president of Peking University’s Institute of International Strategic Studies (IISS), argue that although the deterioration in U.S.-China relations pre-dates the mutual physical isolation of the two countries from each other, renewing robust direct communication between the two societies is necessary, if not sufficient, to stabilizing ties. The report documents the goals and planning for their trips, the unique challenge of traveling during the pandemic, and their observations regarding developments within the two societies and with respect to the bilateral relationship. The report concludes by explaining how the reduction in connectivity has led to the creation of echo chambers, which has fed a vicious cycle further propelling the worsening of ties. They offer a set of five policy proposals intended to interrupt this dynamic, including restoring direct connections across the two societies and resuming and expanding dialogue between the two governments. Read the joint report at: https://bit.ly/3AAbguR Preceding their Breaking the Ice report launch, Scott Kennedy and Wang Jisi summarized their report in Foreign Affairs . They write that: "Whether one believes that the United States and China are destined to be adversaries, might somehow find a pathway back to greater cooperation, or will have a more complicated relationship, it should be clear that it would be better for people from both countries—government officials, business leaders, scholars, and ordinary citizens—to have a greater understanding of each other. And there is no better way to build such mutual understanding than through face-to-face interactions and visits in which people can observe each other’s societies and speak at length in formal and informal settings about their perspectives and experiences." Read the Foreign Affairs report: https://fam.ag/3ViNHQH 2 . Charles Lieber Sentenced to Time Served According to AP on April 26, 2023, former Harvard Professor Charles Lieber -- who was found guilty of concealing his affiliation with a Chinese recruitment program as part of the now-defunct "China Initiative" -- was sentenced to time served in prison (two days) and two years of supervised release with six months of home arrest. He has already paid a fine of $50,000 and restitution to the Internal Revenue Service of $33, 600.In December 2021, Lieber was found guilty of concealing his affiliation with the Wuhan University of Technology and his participation in China’s Thousand Talents Program, a program designed by the Chinese government to recruit high-level scientists, and failing to report payments on his taxes.Lieber’s case was one of the most notable to come out of the U.S. Department of Justice’s "China Initiative," started during the Trump administration in 2018 to curb economic espionage from China.Lieber's attorney Marc Mukasey stressed that Lieber was never charged with espionage-related offenses; was never accused of misusing grant money; there was no theft or trade secrets or intellectual property; and he did not disclose any proprietary research to the Chinese government or university.In February 2022 under the current administration, a decision was made to revamp the program and impose a higher bar for prosecutions after a review based on complaints that it compromised the nation’s competitiveness in research and technology and disproportionally targeted researchers of Asian descent. The federal government ended up dismissing multiple cases against researchers or had them thrown out by judges. Anqi Zhang , one of Lieber’s former doctoral students who is now doing post-doctoral work in chemical engineering at Stanford University, thinks her mentor’s motives have been misrepresented by the government. “He’s the best scientist and the best mentor in the world,” she said. “He’s a pure scientist, he worked very hard, and was focused completely on the science.”Read the AP report at: https://bit.ly/3oNTxND While making false statements to federal agents should not be excused, Professor Xiaoxing Xi of Temple University pointed out in his lecture to Iowa State University (video 58:52) on April 10, 2023, that the investigation of Professor Lieber started because there were "too many Chinese students in his lab." (time mark 22:24)According to Chemistry World on April 27, 2023, as a nanoscience pioneer, Lieber and his research group had received more than $15 million in grants from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense. Over his career, Lieber published more than 400 research papers, and he was the principal inventor on more than 50 patents. Lieber’s contributions to nanotechnology also earned him the Wolf Prize in Chemistry in 2012.Dozens of prominent scientists including many Nobel laureates spoke up for Lieber in a March 2021 open letter . They called the DOJ’s case against him "unjust" and urged the agency to drop it. Their letter also described Lieber as "one of the great scientists of his generation" and warned that government actions against academic like him are having "a chilling effect" on international scientific collaboration.Lieber, who is living with advanced lymphoma and had been on paid administrative leave since his arrest, officially retired in February with little fanfare. Read the Chemistry World Explainer at https://bit.ly/3oUU9kR . Read the APA Justice webpage on Charlie Lieber at https://bit.ly/328FTJP Subscribe to The APA Justice Newsletter Complete this simple form at https://bit.ly/2FJunJM to subscribe. Please share it with those who wish to be informed and join the fight. View past newsletters here: https://bit.ly/APAJ_Newsletters . Back View PDF April 30, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter