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

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

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

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

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

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

Newsletter - #2 SCMP Report, NSF Exclusive, Injunction Against ICE Directive Filed, And More #2 SCMP Report, NSF Exclusive, Injunction Against ICE Directive Filed, And More Back View PDF July 9, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Congressional Actions Track Congress's statements and actions for the AAPI community. Our watchlist contains all of the most pertinent issues and legislations to the Asian American community. Check it out Our Watchlist See organizations', scientists', and community groups' statements and responses to AAPI issues. Explore Community Responses Texas House Bill 1075 and Senate Bill 552 Read More CAPAC Issues Messaging Guidance on Anti-Asian Hate Read More Teaching Asian Pacific American History Act Introduced Read More House Resolution Condemns All Forms of Anti-Asian Sentiment Related to COVID-19 Read More Senator Warner Letter to FBI Director Wray Read More House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff Statement on Racial Profiling Read More

Newsletter - #393 Monthly Meeting Today; APA Heritage Month; NSB Fired by Trump; SCOTUS Case; FISA 702+ #393 Monthly Meeting Today; APA Heritage Month; NSB Fired by Trump; SCOTUS Case; FISA 702+ In This Issue #393 · APA Justice Monthly Meeting Today · May is Asian Pacific American Heritage Month · Entire National Science Board Fired by Trump · Supreme Court Case Affecting the Rights of 12.8 Million Green Card Holders · More on FISA Section 702 · News and Activities for the Communities APA Justice Monthly Meeting Today APA Justice will hold its monthly meeting today, May 4, 2026, starting at 1:55 pm ET. We are honored that Congressman Dave Min will lead off the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month with opening remarks. Elected in 2024 to represent California’s 47th Congressional District in the heart of Orange County, Rep. Min is the son of Korean immigrants and a proud graduate of California public schools. He previously served in the California State Senate from 2020 to 2024. Prior to his public service, he was a law professor at the University of California, Irvine. In addition to updates from: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) We are also honored by the following distinguished speakers: · Robert Underwood , former CAPAC Chair; President Emeritus, University of Guam; Co-Founder, Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies (APAICS) · Madalene Mielke , President and CEO, Asian Pacific American Institute for Congressional Studies (APAICS) · Martin B. Gold , Partner, Capitol Counsel, LLC 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 - Vincent Wang 王文奎 and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . ***** The 1882 Project was a national grassroots effort advocating for U.S. Congressional resolutions formally expressing regret for the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. The successful campaign led to the House and Senate passing these historic resolutions in 2012. During the monthly meeting, Martin B. Gold, pro bono attorney for the 1882 Project, will offer his perspective on how the milestone of the 2011 and 2022 Congressional regret of the discriminatory Chinese exclusion legislation. Ted Gong , Executive Director of The 1882 Foundation, will give brief comments following Marty’s remarks to open the Q&A and discussion session. The 1882 Foundation evolved from the 1882 Project, dedicated to educating the public about the history and ongoing impact of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. On July 4, 2026, The 1882 Foundation will host an event to unveil a mural of Dr. Mabel Ping-Hua Lee 李彬華 at the Chinatown in Washington D.C. Dr. Lee attended Barnard College and later earned a Ph.D. in Economics from Columbia University in 1921, becoming the first Chinese woman in the United States to earn a doctorate in economics. Her academic work and public advocacy reflected her belief that education and civic participation were essential to a thriving democracy. In the 1910s, Lee became an activist for women's suffrage, and participated in the 1912 New York City women's suffrage parade, where she rode on horseback. In 1920, the 19th Amendment was ratified, granting American women the right to vote. Yet Mabel herself could not vote —barred from citizenship under the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Watch the NBC4 report about the mural: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgwbaJzQ-h0 (2:50) May is Asian Pacific American Heritage Month Did you know May is Asian Pacific American Heritage Month and · President Jimmy Carter signed the resolution to create the Asian Pacific American Heritage Week in 1978? · Representatives Frank Horton and Norman Y. Mineta introduced the House resolution and Senators Daniel Inouye and Spark Matsunaga introduced the Senate resolution? · President George H. W. Bush expanded the celebration from a week to a month in 1990? · Hiram Fong 鄺友良 was the first Asian American U.S. senator, serving from Hawaii from 1959 to 1977? · Dalip Singh Saund was the first Asian American elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, serving from California from 1957 to 1963? Patsy Mink was the first Asian American elected to the House. serving from Hawaii (1965–1977 and 1990–2002)? · George Ariyoshi was the first Asian American to serve as a U.S. governor, holding office in Hawaii from 1974 to 1986? · Bing cherry was developed by Ah Bing in the mid-1850s? · Dr. Sammy Lee was the first Asian American man and Vicki Draves was the first Asian American woman to win Olympic gold medals, both achieving this at the 1948 London Summer Olympics? Visit the website hosted by The Library of Congress, National Archives and Records Administration, National Endowment for the Humanities, National Gallery of Art, National Park Service, Smithsonian Institution and United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: https://asianpacificheritage.gov/ . Entire National Science Board Fired by Trump According to Science on April 25, 2026, President Donald Trump abruptly dismissed all 22 members of the National Science Board (NSB), which governs the National Science Foundation. Because the NSB sets policy and approves major spending, the move marks a sharp break from longstanding governance norms and raises concerns about NSF’s independence. Former member Keivan Stassun says the action follows a pattern of sidelining the board, particularly by the Office of Management and Budget, which directed major initiatives without required NSB approval. Tensions intensified after the board opposed a proposed 55% budget cut. Critics, including Rep. Zoe Lofgren and former NSB chair Victor McCrary , warn the firings could politicize oversight. With NSF lacking a permanent director since Sethuraman Panchanathan stepped down, and reports that board directives were already being ignored, the decision deepens concerns about weakened governance and accountability. Read the Science report: https://bit.ly/48CvOEr In a report by the American Institute of Physics on May 1, the White House justified its mass firing of the NSB by citing constitutional concerns tied to the United States v. Arthrex decision. The ruling requires that decisions by non–Senate-confirmed officials be reviewable by a Senate-confirmed authority, and the administration argues the NSB’s structure may no longer comply. The White House says it plans to work with Congress to update the law but has not detailed how. Former board member Julia Phillips said the NSB had already adjusted its role to emphasize advisory recommendations rather than binding decisions to align with the ruling. Democrats, including Zoe Lofgren and Maria Cantwell , dispute the constitutional rationale and argue the firings undermine scientific governance. The move adds to instability at the National Science Foundation, which lacks a confirmed director, faces proposed budget cuts, and has seen staffing and operational disruptions—prompting concern across the scientific community about U.S. research leadership. Association of American Universities President Barbara Snyder said the firings leave NSF “rudderless,” and the American Association for the Advancement of Science issued a statement calling the move “destabilizing.” The Association of Public Land-Grant Universities said it was “dismayed” by the firings . Union of Concerned Scientists CEO Gretchen Goldman criticized the firings as an “unseemly political maneuver” aimed at limiting independent science. The American Chemical Society said it is “deeply concerned” by the firings and connected them to what it called a “troubling recent trend to dissolve scientific advisory bodies.” Since returning to power in 2025, the Trump administration has dissolved or merged more than 100 scientific advisory committees, according to a recent analysis by Nature. Other scientific societies that issued statements critical of the firings include: the American Astronomical Society, the National Academy of Education , the American Society for Microbiology, the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, the Biophysical Society , and the American Institute of Biological Sciences . (AAS is an AIP member society) Read the AIP report: https://bit.ly/4cXgTWx Supreme Court Case Affecting the Rights of 12.8 Million Green Card Holders The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the case of Blanche v. Lau on April 22, 2026, with a decision expected by early July. The case addresses when a returning lawful permanent resident (LPR) can be treated as an “applicant for admission” rather than a returning resident with presumptive entry rights. The case arises from the experience of Muk Choi Lau , a green card holder who faced a pending trademark counterfeiting charge in 2012. After traveling abroad, he was “paroled” into the United States instead of being formally admitted—placing his legal status in question. At issue is the evidentiary standard required at the border. The government argues it can defer proof of a disqualifying crime to later removal proceedings. Lau contends that LPRs are entitled to admission unless the government has clear and convincing evidence at the time of reentry that they committed a disqualifying offense. A report by Just Security highlights the broader stakes, warning that the government’s position could allow border officials to deny reentry and place green card holders in legal limbo based on pending charges or suspicion, potentially without timely judicial review. The report also questions the case’s factual basis and argues it may not warrant such sweeping legal change. The Court’s decision could have far-reaching implications for more than 12 million green card holders, shaping whether—and under what conditions—their status can be challenged when they return to the United States. Read the Just Security report: https://bit.ly/3ORY8fj More on FISA Section 702 On April 30, 2026, CNBC reported that on April 30 the House and Senate passed a 45-day extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. The surveillance program, allowing the U.S. to collect the communications of foreigners, even when interacting with U.S. citizens, was due to expire at the end of April 30. The extension sets up further debate on the controversial spy program when the House and Senate return from a pre-planned recess in mid-May. On April 29, 2026, The Hill reported that the House passed a bill to extend Section 702 of FISA for three years and includes modest reforms, such as expanded oversight, stricter internal review of searches involving Americans, and increased penalties for misuse. However, the bill faced significant opposition from privacy-focused lawmakers in both parties, who object to the lack of a warrant requirement for accessing Americans’ data. Political dynamics have also shifted, with fewer Democrats and more Republicans supporting renewal compared to prior votes. The legislation now heads to the Senate, where its path is uncertain—particularly due to an added provision blocking a central bank digital currency, which some senators oppose. The debate highlights ongoing tensions between national security priorities and civil liberties protections. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/05/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2026/05/11 Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes - Steven Chu 2026/05/12-14 Celebrating 250 - Building America’s Future Together 2026/05/13 The Model Minority Trap: How ‘Positive’ Stereotypes Harm Asian Americans 2026/06/01 APA Justice Monthly MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. Unveiling of Mabel Ping-Hua Lee Mural WHAT : Unveiling of Mabel Ping-Hua Lee Mural WHEN : July 4, 2026 WHERE : Chinatown Archway on H Street, Washington DC HOST : The 1882 Foundation DESCRIPTION: Mabel Ping-Hua Lee 李彬華 was a Chinese American suffragist, scholar, and community leader who believed that democracy depends on equal opportunity for all. FOR MORE INFORMATION : Visit https://1882foundation.org/Mabel/ # # # 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 May 4, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #343 8/4 Meeting; No China Initiative; Heartland to China; Court Defiance; Denaturalization #343 8/4 Meeting; No China Initiative; Heartland to China; Court Defiance; Denaturalization In This Issue #343 · 2025/08/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · 1100+ University Faculty on Harm of Revival of China Initiative · Support the 2nd Heartland Leaders Delegation to China – October 2025 · How the Trump Administration is Defying the Courts · DOJ Prioritizing Denaturalization · News and Activities for the Communities 2025/08/04 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held on Monday, August 4, 2025, starting at 1:55 pm ET.In addition to updates from: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) We are honored by and welcome the following distinguished speakers: · Al Green, Member, U.S. Congress (invited) · Munira Abdullahi , Member, Ohio House of Representatives · Guangya Liu , Member, North Carolina House of Representatives · Min Fan , Executive Director, US Heartland China Association 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 . 1100+ University Faculty on Harm of Revival of China Initiative In a letter addressed to House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole and Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro , Stanford Professors Steven Kivelson and Peter Michelson , on behalf of over 100 Stanford faculty and more than 1,000 faculty and senior research staff nationwide, urge Congress to reject efforts to reinstate the Department of Justice’s China Initiative. The professors argue that the initiative, originally launched to counter intellectual property theft by the Chinese government, instead produced unintended and damaging consequences for the U.S. scientific community and broader national interests. They contend that the China Initiative disproportionately targeted scientists of Chinese descent, fostered a climate of fear and suspicion in academia, and discouraged international collaboration. As a result, it had a chilling effect on global scientific exchange and pushed highly trained researchers—especially in STEM fields—to leave the U.S. or avoid coming altogether. This, the letter argues, played into the hands of the Chinese government more than it thwarted espionage, effectively weakening American leadership in science and innovation. Professors Michelson, Kivelson, and their colleagues emphasize that immigrant scientists are a cornerstone of the U.S. innovation ecosystem. Nearly half of the U.S. STEM PhD workforce is foreign-born, with Chinese nationals making up a significant portion. They note that approximately 90% of Chinese STEM PhDs trained in the U.S. choose to stay, often contributing to cutting-edge research and development in academia and industry. While affirming the importance of protecting national security and intellectual property, the authors advocate for a more balanced, targeted approach to risk management—one that avoids casting suspicion broadly on scientists based on ethnicity or nationality. They cite both the 2022 decision by the DOJ to end the China Initiative and the National Academies' recommendation to reduce its lingering harmful effects as evidence of broad expert consensus. The letter stresses that reviving the China Initiative would not serve U.S. interests and would instead jeopardize the country's ability to attract top global talent. The professors urge Congress to prioritize American competitiveness and innovation by fostering a welcoming and inclusive research environment rather than reviving policies that undermine it. The Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) issued a strong statement of support for the letter, emphasizing that the China Initiative was not only discriminatory but counterproductive to U.S. innovation and national security. AASF warned that reviving the program would drive away critical global talent, weaken scientific progress, and harm the very competitiveness it purports to protect. Executive Director Gisela Perez Kusakawa stated, “Reinstating the China Initiative would be a grave mistake, not only from a civil rights perspective, but also for America’s future as a global leader in science and technology.” AASF reaffirmed its commitment to safeguarding the rights and dignity of all scholars while supporting efforts to maintain U.S. scientific leadership through openness, fairness, and international collaboration.A parallel effort led by Stop AAPI Hate and over 60 civil rights, academic, and advocacy organizations—including APA Justice—echoed these concerns in a joint letter to the same congressional leaders. They urged Congress to remove language in the FY 2026 appropriations bill that would effectively reinstate the China Initiative through the DOJ’s National Security Division. The coalition emphasized the discriminatory nature of the initiative, highlighting its history of racial profiling, unjust prosecutions, and chilling effects on scientific research. They cited high-profile cases such as those of Drs. Anming Hu and Gang Chen as emblematic of the initiative’s failure and harm, and warned that any reinstatement would reverse hard-won progress in civil rights, undermine trust in government, and diminish America’s leadership in science and technology. Support the 2nd Heartland Leaders Delegation to China – October 2025 U.S. Heartland China Association (USHCA) is organizing the 2nd Heartland Leaders Delegation to China this October to attend the Yangtze-Mississippi Regional Dialogue (YMRD) in Wuhan, Hubei Province. USHCA invites the Chinese American community to nominate local leaders to join this important delegation and support their travel and participation. The Chinese American community has always been a bridge between the U.S. and China - championing dialogue, trust, and enduring relationships. As U.S.-China relations deteriorated over the past decade, Chinese Americans often found us stuck in the middle of two global powers. At this critical junction, people-to-people exchanges are among the most effective ways to restore mutual understanding and trust. In recent years, vital exchange programs have been cut, including the Fulbright program and funding for fact-finding travels to China for U.S. congressional staff and lawmakers. Despite all these challenges, U.S. Heartland China Association launched a new exchange program: the Yangtze-Mississippi Regional Dialogue (YMRD), a groundbreaking initiative that builds people-to-people and region-to-region connections between the Mississippi River Basin community and the Yangtze River Basin of China. 2023: Strong Beginning launched by Six U.S. Mayors . The inaugural Yangtze-Mississippi Exchange took place in Shanghai in 2023, where a delegation of six U.S. mayors met with their Chinese counterparts. This was the first U.S. Mayors Delegation to visit China post pandemic ( Press Release , Video recap ) and a powerful demonstration of what’s possible when regional leaders engage globally directly. 2024: Building Momentum in Memphis . The Yangtze-Mississippi Exchange, renamed as Yangtze-Mississippi Regional Dialogue (YMRD), was held in Memphis , with American mayors hosting more than 30 Chinese delegates from Shanghai, Chongqing, Hubei, and Jiangxi. Local leaders from both countries led key discussions on topics such as climate resilience, climate smart agriculture, and green transportation. The dialogue in Memphis underscored how cities are playing an essential role in advancing practical cooperation with Chinese peers. 2025: Charting the next phase in Wuhan . The 3rd YMRD will be held in Wuhan on October 29-30, 2025. Delegates will have an opportunity to not only visit China (Shanghai, Hangzhou, Wuhan) but also to leverage the foundation laid by two prior dialogues to engage with their peers on topics of shared interest in a key region of China. Why Your Support Matters The success of this dialogue depends on the strength of the U.S. delegation and support from the local community as USHCA is dealing with significant funding cuts like many nonprofits in this space. YMRD needs the support of the Chinese American community now more than ever. Here is how you can help: · Nominate local leaders (mayors, county executives, head of local chamber of commerce, business leaders) to join the delegation. · Connect USHCA with local stakeholders interested in exchange and cooperation. · Sponsor or help fund delegate participation and programming. At its core, the Yangtze-Mississippi Regional Dialogue is about local leadership driving global impact. With your help, we can ensure more voices are at the table, and that meaningful relationships continue to grow across the Pacific. Let’s build the future from the ground up—through shared values, mutual respect, and real-world collaboration. Min Fan 范敏, Executive Director of USHCA, has accepted an invitation to speak at the APA Justice monthly meeting on Monday, August 4, 2025 . For more information or to offer support, please contact Min Fan at mfan@usheartlandchina.org How the Trump Administration is Defying the Courts Author: Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications Associate According to recent analysis from The Washington Post , the Trump administration is accused of defying court rulings in roughly a third of the more than 160 lawsuits it has lost, raising concerns about its disregard for judicial authority in the U.S. Of the 337 lawsuits filed against the administration since the beginning of Trump’s return to office, courts have ruled against the administration in 165 of the lawsuits. In 57 of those cases, the Post found that the administration is accused of defying or frustrating court oversight. The Trump administration has routinely defied court rulings, provided false information, withheld evidence, quietly circumvented court orders, and devised pretexts to pursue actions that have been blocked. Such conduct is unprecedented for any presidential administration and threatens to undermine the judiciary’s rule as a check on the executive branch. As of yet, no judge has taken punitive action to force compliance. Legal analysts are unsurprised as courts are typically slow to begin contempt proceedings for noncompliance. Furthermore, the judicial system cannot enforce their own rulings — that authority remains with the U.S. Marshals Service. Judges are concerned the U.S. Marshals will not comply with court directives, as an entity of the executive branch whose director is appointed by the president. Immigration cases have seen the most resistance, as evidenced in the case of Kilmar Abrego García . The Supreme Court ordered the government to facilitate his return after the administration deported him to a notorious prison in El Salvador despite a court order forbidding his removal to that country. He remained there for almost two months. The administration also clashed with Chief U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg who ordered that deportation flights to El Salvador be turned around. The administration disregarded the order. According to a whistleblower complaint filed by fired Justice Department attorney Erez Reuveni , Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove told staffers that a judge might try to block them, and that it might be necessary to tell a court “f— you’’ and ignore the order. The Trump administration also disregarded the order of U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher , a Trump appointee, to facilitate the return of a Venezuelan man who was wrongfully deported to El Salvador. Other problematic cases regard cuts to federal funding and the workforce. Such clashes involved layoffs at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the freezing of all federal grants and loans by the White House Office of Management and Budget, and a ban on transgender people in the military. Judge Boasberg remains the only judge to actively pursue sanctioning the administration for its conduct. The contempt proceedings he instigated were paused without explanation by an appeals court panel three months ago. On January 21, 2025, Just Security started a Litigation Tracker on Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions . The number of cases it is tracking closely resembles Washington Post ’s report although it treats over 100 lawsuits involving the removal of F-1 foreign student visa registration as one. The New York Times also maintains a tracker on Lawsuits against Trump’s Agenda in topical order. The administration’s pattern of disregarding judicial rulings undermines a fundamental principle of democratic governance: that no branch of government is above the law. When court orders are ignored without consequence, it erodes public confidence in the judiciary’s ability to serve as a check on executive power. DOJ Prioritizing Denaturalization Author: Madeleine Gable, APA Justice Communications Associate According to an internal memo published online on June 11, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is aggressively prioritizing denaturalization cases and expanding the criteria necessary for pursuing denaturalization cases. The memo lists 10 categories of priority for such cases. Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate wrote that denaturalization will be among the agency’s top five enforcement priorities for the civil division. This renewed focus reflects a broader historical pattern. As NPR explains, denaturalization was heavily employed during the McCarthy era of the late 1940s and early 1950s to revoke the citizenship of individuals who concealed criminal convictions or affiliations with prohibited groups—such as Nazis or communists—on their naturalization applications. According to a report published by Cassandra Robertson , a law professor at Case Western Reserve University, there were about 22,000 cases of denaturalization filed a year during the McCarthy era. In 1967, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that found denaturalization “inconsistent with the American form of democracy, because it creates two levels of citizenship.” Between 1990 and 2017, the DOJ filed an average of 11 denaturalization cases per year. However, the practice saw expansion under the Obama administration as they began using new digital tools to find potential denaturalization fraud cases going back decades. Denaturalization grew even more prevalent during President Trump's first term. Irina Manta , a Hofstra University professor and co-author of the report with Robertson, found an average of 42 denaturalization cases filed per year during President Trump’s first term and an average of 16 per year filed during President Biden’s term. The first Trump administration sought to significantly expand the government’s use of denaturalization and chose to file denaturalization cases via civil courts rather than criminal. In 2018, the Trump administration created a new office within U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services dedicated to reviewing and initiating denaturalization proceedings against thousands of individuals. Denaturalization, the legal process of revoking U.S. citizenship from a naturalized immigrant, carries significant consequences. Once stripped of citizenship, the individual returns to the immigration status they held before becoming a U.S. citizen. Afterwards, they may face deportation if they do not have lawful immigration status and/or serve jail time if denaturalization was due to a criminal conviction. According to the DOJ memo, there are two grounds for denaturalization: 1. Procurement of naturalization by concealing a material fact or by willful misrepresentation 2. Illegal procurement of naturalization In M aslenjak v. United States in 2017, the Supreme Court unanimously held that only an illegal act that played a role in an individual’s procurement of U.S. citizenship could be grounds for criminal denaturalization. This decision narrowed the scope under which an individual could be denaturalized. According to Robertson, the especially concerning aspect of the DOJ memo is that it directs the federal government to pursue denaturalization efforts via civil litigation. In civil proceedings, the individual subject to denaturalization is not entitled to an attorney, and there is a lower burden of proof for the government to reach. Robertson insists that pursuing denaturalization via civil litigation violates due process and infringes on the rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Sameera Hafiz , policy director of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, is especially concerned with the expanded criteria of which crimes put an individual at risk of denaturalization. According to the memo, expanded criteria include national security violations and acts of fraud against individuals or against the government, such as Paycheck Protection Program loan fraud or Medicaid fraud. Hafiz says this is synonymous with “trying to create a second class of U.S. citizens,” where U.S. citizens born in the country are safe and those who were not are at risk of losing their citizenship. The memo also gives U.S. attorneys broader discretion to determine eligible denaturalization cases. Steve Lubet , professor emeritus at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, said the memo grants the federal government “wide discretion” on deciding whom to target, calling the categories “so vague as to be meaningless.” Lubet also raised concerns about the impact of denaturalization on families, particularly children who received U.S. citizenship through a parent whose naturalization was later revoked. Robertson remains concerned about the prioritization of denaturalization as “there just aren’t very many cases that fit within the framework of priorities.” This will cause the administration to focus on “people who have not committed any serious infraction, or maybe any infraction at all.” Concerns remain that the government’s aggressive denaturalization efforts could lead to the revocation of U.S. citizenship of many individuals who made minor or unintentional mistakes in their application. Many of the questions are vague, broad, and unclear. In addition, courts have not specified what constitutes an offense material to the individual obtaining citizenship and could be the basis for a denaturalization proceeding. The focus on denaturalization is the latest effort by the Trump administration to reshape the immigrant landscape in the U.S. Since his return to office, President Trump has also sought to end birthright citizenship and curtail refugee programs. The Denaturalization Fact Sheet produced by the National Immigration Forum is a concise, informative document that explains what denaturalization is, the legal grounds for it, and how the process works. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2025/07/24 2025 ILF Scholarship & Awards Gala2025/07/25 From Classroom to Commerce: The Value of Chinese Students to American Business2025/07/25-27 Asian American Pioneer Medal Symposium and Ceremony 2025/07/28 (Digital) Travel Safety and Security Training2025/07/29 C100 Conversations – “Recollections, Pioneers and Heroes” with Linda Chao Yang2025/07/29 From Heartland to Mainland: 2025 Future Ag Leaders Delegation2025/07/29 Bridging Generations of U.S.-China Education Exchange: American Scholars to China2025/07/31 (Digital) Travel Safety and Security Training2025/07/31-08/10 Asian American International Film Festival2025/08/02-07 2025 Joint Statistical Meetings2025/08/04 APA Justice Monthly MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. Travel Safety & Security Training on July 28 and 31, 2025 Are you currently overseas and traveling back to the United States later this summer? The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) is offering a one-hour information session with the Democracy Security Project (DSP) on how you should mitigate both cyber and physical vulnerabilities while traveling. The team at DSP will offer practical and pragmatic solutions on a number of subjects like handling your devices, data privacy, and border security best practices.The same session is offered twice, on July 28 at 8:00 p.m. ET and July 31 at 10:00 a.m. ET. Register and receive the Zoom information at: · Register for the July 28 meeting here . · Register for the July 31 meeting here . For more information on the event, please email: · AFT Union Leadership Institute ( uli_support@aft.org ) · AFT Higher Education Division ( highereddept@aft.org ) # # # 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 July 24, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #1 Reminder Of July 6 Meeting #1 Reminder Of July 6 Meeting Back View PDF July 5, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #290 Special Edition: McCarthyism and The Good, Bad, and Ugly of The Media #290 Special Edition: McCarthyism and The Good, Bad, and Ugly of The Media In This Issue #290 · Rise and Fall of McCarthyism with The Media · Historical Media Bias Against U.S. Persons of Asian Origin · Role of Media in The Wen Ho Lee Case and The Yanping Chen Case · Media's Role in a Modern McCarthyism - The "China Initiative" · McCarthyism Expanding to Beyond Scientists · News and Activities for the Communities During "China Week" in September 2024, Representative Judy Chu , Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), took the House floor to denounce efforts to revive the "China Initiative," calling it a New McCarthyism.This is a special edition on McCarthyism and The Good, Bad, and Ugly Roles of The Media. Rise and Fall of McCarthyism with The Media According to a PBS report on McCarthyism from August 23, 2006, in the late 1940s and 1950s, America was gripped by fears of communism’s spread, particularly in Eastern Europe and China. Capitalizing on these anxieties, on February 9, 1950, 41-year-old Senator Joseph McCarthy delivered his infamous "Enemies from Within" speech in Wheeling, West Virginia, claiming to have a list of 205 "card-carrying" communists in the U.S. government. Although he never substantiated this claim, it fueled the Red Scare and set the stage for McCarthyism, an era of intense political repression and paranoia.The media played a significant role in amplifying and spreading McCarthyism. Newspapers, radio, and television often reported McCarthy's accusations uncritically, lending credibility to his unverified claims. For instance, the New York Times covered McCarthy’s “205 communists” allegation without questioning its validity. Historian Margaret Brennan noted that McCarthy’s numbers changed frequently, saying, “he had no list. He had no names. It was all a big lie." Yet, the impact was horrific, 6,000 federal employees left the government in the last two years of the Harry S. Truman Administration. At the end of the McCarthy era, "there was never anybody in government that they could prove to be a card-carrying communist," Brennan said.Sensational headlines and broadcast coverage heightened public fear, reinforcing McCarthy’s portrayal of Communism as a pressing internal threat. Television brought the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) hearings and the Red Scare directly into American homes, magnifying McCarthy’s influence. The McCarthy-Army hearings, televised from April to June 1954, marked a turning point. Over 36 days, an estimated 188 hours were broadcast, reaching a large national audience. During these hearings, Army counsel Joseph Welch famously rebuked McCarthy, asking, “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?” This moment is widely viewed as the beginning of McCarthy’s downfall. Most journalists initially refrained from challenging McCarthy due to Cold War tensions and fears of being labeled Communist sympathizers. However, broadcast journalist Edward R. Murrow played a pivotal role in countering McCarthyism. On March 9, 1954, Murrow’s See It Now broadcast exposed McCarthy’s fear-based tactics, marking a major turning point in public opinion.The following is a transcript for a 2-minute excerpt of Murrow's broadcast: "No one familiar with the history of this country can deny that congressional committees are useful. It is necessary to investigate before legislating, but the line between investigating and persecuting is a very fine one, and the junior Senator from Wisconsin has stepped over it repeatedly. His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind as between the internal and the external threats of communism. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men—not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were for the moment unpopular. This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy's methods to keep silent, or for those who approve. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities. As a nation, we have come into our full inheritance at a tender age. We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom—wherever it continues to exist in the world—but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn’t create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it—and rather successfully. Cassius was right: "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves. Good night, and good luck." Edward R. Murrow profoundly shaped broadcast journalism, setting standards with his commitment to factual reporting, democratic principles, and the press’s role as a vigilant watchdog. The Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University continues this legacy, promoting ethical journalism, strategic communication, and digital media, all inspired by Murrow's unwavering dedication to integrity and accountability in the media. References and Links Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University: website 2017/04/23 YouTube : Edward R. Murrow - See It Now (March 9, 1954) (2:02)2014/12/16 C-SPAN : Senator Joe McCarthy's "Enemies from Within" Speech (14:59)2006/08/23 PBS : McCarthyism Historical Media Bias Against U.S. Persons of Asian Origin Throughout U.S. history, media have often depicted Americans and immigrants of Asian origin through biased and derogatory stereotypes, particularly during times of geopolitical tension. Their coverage has fueled harmful public perceptions and policies with lasting impacts on Asian communities.Notwithstanding the 61-year Chinese Exclusion era (1882-1943) and the Alien Land Law period from the first state law in California in 1913 to the mid 1950s, American newspapers contributed to the anti-Japanese sentiment by portraying Japanese Americans as disloyal spies or saboteurs. Headlines warned of a “Fifth Column” within the U.S., stoking fear and prejudice. This coverage, often based on unsubstantiated claims, helped garner public support for the internment of 120,000 persons of Japanese heritage, about two thirds of them U.S. citizens.No Japanese American was ever proven to have committed espionage for Japan during World War II, despite extensive U.S. government investigations.Before his children books, Dr. Seuss ( Theodor Seuss Geisel ) worked as a political cartoonist and propagandist during World War II, creating cartoons and illustrations that were published in newspapers and used in military training films. One of his infamous cartoons on February 13, 1942, shows Japanese Americans lined up as the "Fifth Column" along the West Coast, awaiting "the signal from home," playing into widespread fear and prejudice and helped to justify Japanese American internment and other discriminatory measures. On February 21, 1942, two days after President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 authorizing internment, the Los Angeles Times published an editorial endorsing it, asserting that Japanese Americans posed a national security risk. Along with other outlets, the LA Times shaped public opinion by promoting fear-based narratives questioning Japanese American loyalty.Seventy-five years later, on February 19, 2017, the LA Times formally recanted its 1942 editorials. Acknowledging the paper's role in promoting internment, it expressed regret for fueling anti-Japanese sentiment and drew parallels with current issues of xenophobia, discrimination, and anti-immigrant rhetoric. The 2017 editorial warned against repeating such injustices, highlighting the need to protect civil liberties for all. References and Links Wikipedia: Dr. Seuss 2017/02/19 LA Times editorial: Looking Back with Shame 2012/02/21 The Daily Mirror : Times Editorial Praises Japanese Evacuation Role of Media in The Wen Ho Lee Case and The Yanping Chen Case History repeated itself before the LA Times issued its 2017 editorial.On March 6, 1999, the New York Times identified Chinese American nuclear scientist Dr. Wen Ho Lee as a suspect in alleged espionage at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Using alarmist language, anonymous sources, and unsubstantiated allegations, the report relied heavily on stereotypes and ethnic background, fueling widespread public suspicion of Dr. Lee and, by extension, other Chinese Americans in the scientific community.. Dr. Lee was arrested nine months after the New York Times report and imprisoned in solitary confinement for nine months before charges were dropped. U.S. District Judge James Parker apologized to Dr. Lee, condemning the government’s handling of the case.On September 26, 2000, the New York Times published an editorial acknowledging its role and errors in uncritically accepting government claims, but it stopped short of a full apology.In 2006, Dr. Lee settled a privacy lawsuit, accusing government agencies of leaking sensitive information. The U.S. government paid $895,000, and five media organizations—the New York Times , Washington Post , Los Angeles Times , ABC News , and Associated Press —contributed $750,000 to protect their reporters from being compelled to disclose their sources. Dr. Lee’s case highlighted issues in journalistic ethics and transparency, but similar patterns emerged when Dr. Yanping Chen , a Chinese American academic and founder of the University of Management and Technology in Virginia, became the target of a federal investigation in 2010. Although no charges were filed, leaked details of the closed investigation surfaced in a series of Fox News reports in 2017, making misleading insinuations to accuse her of spying for China.In 2018, Dr. Chen filed a lawsuit against federal agencies, alleging Privacy Act violations and racial profiling. Her case raised broader concerns about government leaks and anti-Asian prejudice. Dr. Chen subpoenaed Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge to identify her sources. The U.S. District Court imposed a fine of $800 per day until Herridge complied. Herridge has appealed.On July 29, 2024, the Asian American Legal and Education Defense Fund (AALDEF) and a coalition of 11 organizations filed a 43-page amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals in support of Dr. Chen. The brief addresses issues of racial prejudice and the negative stereotyping of Asian Americans, particularly in the context of government actions against Dr. Chen.The U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit will hold a hearing of oral arguments on Dr. Chen's case on November 18, 2024. References and Links CourtListener: Chen v. Federal Bureau of Investigation (1:18-cv-03074) 2024/08/07 AADELF: The Red-Baiting of Dr. Chen and the Dangerous Target It Puts on All Asian Americans 2024/07/29 Chen v FBI 1:18-cv-03074: Brief of Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund and Asian American Advocacy Organizations as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff-Appellee 2006/06/03 Washington Post : Wen Ho Lee Settles Privacy Lawsuit 2003/01/08 Wen Ho Lee and Helen Zia: My Country Versus Me: The First-Hand Account by the Los Alamos Scientist Who Was Falsely Accused of Being a Spy 2001/02/04 New York Times : The Making of a Suspect: The Case of Wen Ho Lee 2000/09/26 New York Times : From The Editors; The Times and Wen Ho Lee 2000/09/14 New York Times: Statement by Judge in Los Alamos Case, With Apology for Abuse of Power 1999/03/06 New York Times: BREACH AT LOS ALAMOS: A special report.; China Stole Nuclear Secrets For Bombs, U.S. Aides Say Media's Role in a Modern McCarthyism - The "China Initiative" In March 1950, Herb Block , a political cartoonist known as "Herblock" for the Washington Post , coined the term "McCarthyism" shortly after Senator Joseph McCarthy delivered his "Enemies Within Us" speech. This term describes the practice of making unfounded accusations of subversion, disloyalty, or treason without sufficient evidence. Today, McCarthyism symbolizes any campaign or movement that seeks to silence or punish dissent or perceived disloyalty through fear and intimidation, rather than through fair, evidence-based processes.Launched by the Department of Justice in 2018, the "China Initiative" reflects contemporary McCarthyism through its reliance on broad suspicion and racial profiling under the guise of national security. It was joined in effect by the National Institutes of Health in the name of research security and integrity. These initiatives then shifted focus from security concerns to profiling Chinese academics and scientists, fostering an atmosphere of fear and a chilling effect within academic and research communities. Many researchers of Chinese descent reported feeling unfairly targeted solely due to their ethnicity or international connections.The consequences of the "China Initiative" have been severe; even when charges were eventually dropped, individuals faced damaged careers, personal trauma, financial ruin, and even loss of life. Hundreds, if not thousands or more, of Asian Americans and immigrants, particularly those of Chinese origin, have been subjected to surveillance, investigations, and threats of prosecution. Many more endure daily assaults, hate incidents, and discrimination as a result. The media's role in the "China Initiative" brought a range of both positive and negative impacts. Jamie Satterfield , an investigative reporter for the Knoxville News Sentinel , played a crucial role in highlighting the wrongful accusations against Dr. Anming Hu , a University of Tennessee professor prosecuted under the “China Initiative.” Her reporting exposed significant flaws in the government’s case, illustrating how the FBI targeted Hu based on unfounded suspicions and employed aggressive tactics, including attempts to coerce him into espionage.Satterfield documented the trial proceedings in 2021 meticulously, revealing key admissions from FBI agents about false accusations and fabricated evidence against Hu. Her work not only drew national attention to the injustices faced by Hu but also sparked broader discussions about racial profiling, due process, and fairness within the framework of the "China Initiative," emphasizing its detrimental impact on innocent Chinese American academics.On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published two investigative reports. The first report revealed that the "China Initiative" deviated from its national security goals. Key findings include a lack of official definition for the initiative, a shift from economic espionage to “research integrity” issues, and a high dismissal rate for cases. Notably, only about 25% of those charged were convicted, with about 90% of defendants being of Chinese heritage. The second investigative report highlighted gaps in the information provided by DOJ. MIT Technology Review constructed a database to track every case made public under the "China Initiative." Shortly after MIT Technology Review requested comments, DOJ updated its webpage, removing cases that contradicted its narrative of success. Less than three months after the MIT Technology Review reports, DOJ announced the formal end of the "China Initiative."Both Satterfield and MIT Technology Review exemplify the positive role of investigative journalism, utilizing facts and evidence to expose the overreach, profiling, and flaws of the initiative. Their efforts raised public awareness and sparked dialogue about racial bias in government investigations, holding agencies accountable and prompting policymakers and civil rights organizations to reconsider the initiative's efficacy and ethics, ultimately contributing to its termination in 2022.In contrast, some media outlets resorted to alarmist and sensational language, reinforcing stereotypes and depicting Asian Americans and immigrants—particularly those of Chinese descent—as potential threats. Headlines often emphasized national security concerns without adequate context, exacerbating public fears about espionage and fostering an atmosphere of suspicion. By uncritically repeating government statements, some of these outlets lent the initiative unwarranted credibility. They frequently overlooked the scientific and academic contributions of Chinese and Chinese American professionals, sidelining their valuable work and contributions to the American society. References and Links APA Justice: 11. MIT Technology Review Investigative Reports CourtListener: United States v. Hu (TV1) (3:20-cr-00021) 2021/12/02 MIT Technology Review : The US crackdown on Chinese economic espionage is a mess. We have the data to show it. 2021/12/02 MIT Technology Review : We built a database to understand the China Initiative. Then the government changed its records. 2021/06/13 Knox News : Trial reveals federal agents falsely accused a UT professor born in China of spying McCarthyism Expanding to Beyond Scientists There are continuing attempts by Republican members in Congress to reinstate the "China Initiative" or under a different name. Alien land laws are being revived and expanded at both the federal and state levels that will risk reinforcing racial discrimination."Enemies Within Us" against immigrants in a nation of immigrants has resurfaced as a prominent topic in the lead-up to the November 5, 2024, U.S. presidential election, framing a focus on Chinese influence in America. Media, politicians, and campaign ads are again promoting anti-Asian rhetoric and harmful political narratives and stereotypes about Chinese Americans as perpetual foreigners or national security risks. On September 3, 2024, The Washington Post released a report titled "How China Extended Its Repression into an American City," alleging Chinese government interference within U.S. communities. As explained in the Asia Times, "The Washington Post ’s Witch Hunt on Chinese Americans" lacks evidence. An October 4 opinion argues that the Washington Post report fosters distrust toward Chinese American communities by selective use of biased sources—primarily anti-CCP activists and U.S. government entities. By failing to represent voices within the Chinese American community who have diverse views on China, the opinion contends, the report risks fostering harmful stereotypes and echoing historical patterns of profiling minority groups based on geopolitics. A more balanced approach would involve perspectives from diaspora organizations that may experience complex, often nonpolitical relationships with Chinese institutions. It also warns against blanket assumptions about the loyalties of Chinese Americans, potentially leading to unfounded public suspicion of these communities.On October 21, 2024, a Wall Street Journal report alleged China of using hometown organizations in New York City’s Chinatown to influence local communities, pressure Chinese Americans, and advance its political goals. Without evidence of specific influence activities, Representative Grace Meng , the only Chinese American congresswoman from New York, was implicated in the Wall Street Journal report because of her association with Chinatown and hometown organizations.Chinatowns in the U.S. emerged as ethnic enclaves largely because of social, economic, and political conditions in the U.S. in the mid-19th century dating back to the Qing Dynasty. These communities offered safety, employment, and a cultural connection to home for new immigrants facing systemic discrimination and harsh labor conditions. Discriminatory laws forced segregation and led to the establishment of Chinatowns and hometown associations as self-sustaining neighborhoods where immigrants could find mutual support, housing, work opportunities, and Chinese-owned businesses, fostering community resilience against external hostilities. Guilt by association, the unfair assignment of blame to individuals based solely on their affiliations rather than on concrete evidence, was a central tactic of McCarthyism. While WWII-era suspicions focused on a supposed "Fifth Column" of internal threats, the "Thousand Grains of Sand" theory arose during the Wen Ho Lee case in the 1990s, insinuating alleged widespread infiltration efforts by Chinese agents. The term evolved to "Non-traditional Collectors" as the "China Initiative" began, with scrutiny directed toward Chinese and Chinese American scientists and academics suspected of espionage.Now , with media coverage increasingly emphasizing potential links to foreign influence in Chinese American communities, guilt by association appears to be broadening beyond scientists and researchers. With the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal already linking community organizations or elected officials to foreign interference based on limited or circumstantial connections, guilt by association, or a new McCarthyism, may become more pervasive again with the assistance of media. "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason," - Edward R. Murrow References and Links 2024/10/21 Wall Street Journal : How Beijing Recruited New York Chinatowns for Influence Campaign 2024/10/04 Asia Times opinion : The Washington Post’s witch hunt on Chinese Americans 2024/09/03 Washington Post : How China extended its repression into an American city News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2024/11/03 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/11/06 Asian American Women in Media and Music2024/11/10 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/11/12 Threats to International Engagement and Academic Freedom2024/11/14 An Advice and Networking Event (Financial Services, Investing and Consulting)2024/11/15 Yangtze-Mississippi Regional Dialogue2024/11/15-17 AAASE Inaugural Annual Summit2024/11/17 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/11/18 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2024/11/24 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. NOTE: Because the regular scheduled day falls on the eve of Election Day, we have moved the next APA Justice monthly meeting to Monday, November 18, 2024. The virtual monthly meeting is by invitation only. It is closed to the press. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Steven Pei 白先慎 , Vincent Wang 王文奎 , and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . 2. APA Justice Newsletter Web Page Moved to New Website As part of its continuing migration to a new website under construction, we have moved the Newsletter webpage to https://www.apajusticetaskforce.org/newsletters . Content of the existing website will remain, but it will no longer be updated. We value your feedback about the new web page. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF October 30, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter