Am I required to answer? Mostly, no. You are generally not required to answer FBI or police questions (except, e.g., if you are asked for identification while driving a vehicle). Do I have the right to consult an attorney first? Yes. You have a right to talk to an attorney. If an FBI agent or police officer asks to speak to you, tell him or her that you want to consult with an attorney first. If you want to talk to the FBI or police, your attorney can respond on your behalf to set up an interview. Can information I give to the FBI without an attorney be harmful? Yes. ANY information you give to an officer without an attorney, even if it seems harmless, can be used against you or someone else. Lying to a federal officer is a crime. Remaining silent is NOT a crime (except in limited situations when you can be required to identify yourself). Am I required to allow the officer into my home? You are NOT required to allow the officer into your home without a warrant. Ask to see the warrant. If the officer does not have one, you do not have to let him/her into your home. However, do not try to stop him/her if he forces his way into your home or office. Simply state that they do not have your permission to enter. Do I have the right to see a warrant if the officer says that they have one? Yes. If the officer says that they have a warrant for your arrest, you have a right to see the warrant. You must go with the officer, but you do not have to answer questions until you consult an attorney. What should I do if I am detained? If you are detained, you should ask for an attorney and remain silent. What are my rights at the airport? Learn about your rights at the airport here . Questioned by the FBI or police? This is a letter to persons who believe they might be contacted by their employer, a funder, or government officials regarding their relationship to the People’s Republic of China. This includes, for example, university professors who have received grants to support their academic activities; researchers in STEM fields working in the private sector; civil servants; and even U.S. military personnel. It also includes individuals regardless of citizenship; holding a green card, having naturalized, or even being a native-born citizen will not protect you from potential problems. The most important message here is: if you have any concerns at all, you should consult with a lawyer as soon as possible, preferably one with specialized expertise. Read full letter Why you need a lawyer Frank H. Wu President Designate, Queens College, The City University of New York KNOW YOUR RIGHTS The FBI and other agencies have been questioning people across the country based on their First Amendment activity and on their race, ethnicity or national origin. Protect yourself by knowing your rights. Learn more Read Frank Wu's letter

Xifeng Wu 吴息凤 Dean and Professor of School of Public Health, Vice President of the Second Affiliated Hospital, Director of the National Institute for Data Science in Health and Medicine, Zhejiang University, China Former Director, Center for Public Health and Translational Genomics, Professor, Department of Epidemiology at the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) Dr. Xifeng Wu is Dean and Professor of School of Public Health, Vice President of The Second Affiliated Hospital, Director of National Institute for Data Science in Health and Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. She joined Zhejiang University in March 2019.Dr. Wu is also a naturalized U.S. citizen. She was Director, Center for Public Health and Translational Genomics and Professor, Department of Epidemiology at the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) in Houston. Dr. Wu was subjected to multi-year harassment and investigations. She was put on administrative leave for over a year. During that time, she was not allowed to return to her research laboratory, talk to researchers in her research group and after three months all her research grants were reassigned to other researchers. In other words, her research career was put on hold since December 2017, immediately after MDACC turned over 10-years records of 23 researchers over to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and 8 months before MDACC received the letters from the National Institute of Health (NIH) in August 2018.Dr. Wu retired from MDACC in early 2019. Several other Chinese American scientists were also forced to either retire or leave. Dr. Wu is one of many victims of ongoing racial profiling. While she is able to use her expertise to combat COVID-19 in China, her family still lives in Houston. This is a vivid example of how profiling results in U.S. loss of talent, competitiveness, and leadership in today's science and technology when we need them the most. Lessons Learned from Coronavirus Experience in Zhejiang and Hangzhou As the coronavirus crisis is ending in China in March 2020, the U.S. declared a national emergency. Dr. Wu published an article titled " 6 lessons from China's Zhejiang Province and Hangzhou on how countries can prevent and rebound from an epidemic like COVID-19 " in the World Economic Forum on March 12, 2020. It offers valuable lessons the global community including the U.S. could learn at national and local levels. They are Speed and accuracy are the keys to identification and detection Make the right decisions at the right time, the right place, for the right people Big data and information technology are important to avoiding a rebound Evaluate medical resources and response systems. Are we ready for a pandemic? How much stock do we need? Do we have enough health care personnel, and how do we protect them? Implementation of preventive measures in communities, schools, businesses, government offices and homes can influence the trajectory of this epidemic Keep the public well informed 2009 Rogers Award Lauds Wu for Cutting-Edge Research In 2009, MD Anderson published the following report on Dr. Wu receiving the Julie and Ben Rogers Award for Excellence in Research: “The words ‘visionary’ and ‘revolutionary’ have been used to describe the work of Xifeng Wu, M.D., Ph.D., professor of epidemiology in the Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences at MD Anderson. “Recipient of the 2008 Julie and Ben Rogers Award for Excellence in Research, Wu has created a molecular epidemiology research program that bridges epidemiology, statistics, laboratory study and clinical research. With a focus on identifying cancer risk factors as well as markers that can predict an individual’s response to treatment, her research is essential in the quest to develop personalized cancer therapies and to improve prevention efforts. “’These models may help clinicians identify patients who are most and least likely to benefit from treatments, as well as those most likely to develop toxic reactions,’ she says. “Wu is the principal investigator on nine epidemiological studies funded by the National Institutes of Health. She is a collaborative investigator on many other NIH-funded grants, including a recent multi-institutional study of bladder cancer, which she directed. “’I see these integrative projects as the best way to translate science into medicine,’ she says. ‘They’re only possible through close teamwork within a large multidisciplinary group of scientists.’ “Though Wu began her medical education in China, she has spent all of her academic career at MD Anderson. She received her medical degree from Shanghai Medical University in 1984 and her Ph.D. in epidemiology from The University of Texas School of Public Health in 1994. She joined MD Anderson in 1995 as an assistant professor and by 2004 was a full professor. She held an Ashbel Smith Professorship from 2006 to 2008. She holds the Betty B. Marcus Chair in Cancer Prevention at MD Anderson and also is on the faculty of The University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences. “Wu is internationally recognized for her pioneering work in genetic cancer susceptibility markers and germline genetic variations. One of her major interests is pharmacogenetics, a new field that identifies genetic variations that can help determine why some patients respond better than others to therapeutic drugs. “Somehow Wu also finds time to lead a multidisciplinary team of 35 people. “’Mentoring trainees and junior faculty members is a responsibility and a privilege,’ she says. ‘They are the future of science and discovery, and I take great pride in their every success. To me, their success is my success. It is my dream that they will cherish the institution’s core values of caring, integrity and discovery as I do and spread them all over the world when they become independent investigators.’” References and Links Zhejiang University: Xifeng Wu 浙江大学: 吴息凤 2020/05/20 World Affairs Council: The Public Health Response to Covid-19 in Zhejiang Province and Washington State – Virtual Program 2020/03/18 ProPublica: The Trump Administration Drove Him Back to China, Where He Invented a Fast Coronavirus Test 2020/03/18 Chronicle of Higher Education: Hounded Out of U.S., Scientist Invents Fast Coronavirus Test in China 2020/03/12 World Economic Forum: 6 lessons from China's Zhejiang Province and Hangzhou on how countries can prevent and rebound from an epidemic like COVID-19 2019/06/20 South China Morning Post: Creating a climate of fear for Chinese scientists in the US benefits neither Washington nor Beijing 2019/06/17 Next Shark: FBI Accused of Targeting Chinese Americans Trying to Cure Cancer for ‘Spying’ 2019/06/14 Clean Technica: FBI & NIH Demonize Chinese Researchers As Trump-Inspired Paranoia Spreads Across America 2019/06/14 Axios: U.S. targeting Chinese cancer researchers 2019/06/13 Bloomberg Businessweek: The U.S. Is Purging Chinese Cancer Researchers From Top Institutions 2019/04/19 Science: Exclusive: Major U.S. cancer center ousts ‘Asian’ researchers after NIH flags their foreign ties 2016/10/21 Houston Chronicle: Research: Dr. Xifeng Wu 2009 MD Anderson Center: Accolades and achievements Previous Item Next Item

The "China Initiative" A US government national-security program, created to address economic espionage, disproportionately targeted Asian Americans and academic communities for administrative errors and harmed academic freedom and open science. THE NUMBERS Known Cases 77 Known Impacted Individuals 162 Days Lasted 1,210 Explore the China Initiative What is it? Timeline of Events Impacted Persons Webinars What is the "China Initiative"? The "China Initiative" refers to a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) effort that was launched under the Trump Administration in November 2018. Its original aim was to combat economic espionage and theft of intellectual property that the U.S. government believed was being conducted by Chinese entities, including individuals and organizations with ties to the Chinese government. However, the “China Initiative” resulted in four major concerns: 1. Racial Profiling: The initiative led to racial profiling and the unfair targeting of Asian Americans. Individuals of Asian descent, including Chinese Americans, faced increased scrutiny or suspicion based on their ethnicity rather than any evidence of wrongdoing. 2. Stigmatization: The initiative perpetuated stereotypes and stigmatization of Asian Americans, making them feel like they are under suspicion or not fully trusted solely because of their heritage. 3. Impact on Scientific Collaboration: The initiative created a chilling effect on scientific collaboration between U.S. and Chinese researchers, hindering legitimate collaborative efforts and harming US leadership in science and technology. 4. Government Overreach. The initiative was overly broad, allowed abuse and misuse of authority by some law enforcement agents, and caused severe damage to the career, finance, and reputation of innocent individuals and their families. The “China Initiative” ended officially in February 2022 under the Biden Administration, but the harms it inflicted on targeted individuals and the broader AAPI community remain. Timeline of Major Events Nov 1, 2018 U.S. Attorney General Jeff Session launched the China Initiative to combat national security threats and economic espionage emanating from the People’s Republic of China. Without a definition of what constitutes a China Initiative case, it drifted to profile and stigmatize Asian Americans and individuals of Asian descent, creating severe damage and a chilling effect on scientific collaboration and harming U.S. leadership in science and technology. 1. DOJ launched China Initiative Read more Dec 7, 2018 A month after the launch of the China Initiative, a group of community leaders met with a senior FBI official and representatives at the FBI headquarters in Washington DC to convey concerns raised within the Chinese American community about the role of bias in its investigations, among other issues, in a futile attempt to establish a continuing dialogue to address the concerns. 2. Attempted Dialogue with FBI Failed Read more Apr 19, 2019 Headlined by “How Not to Cure Cancer – The U.S. is purging Chinese scientists in a New Red Scare,” investigative reports emerged on FBI and NIH nationwide activities targeting individuals of Asian descent, especially biomedical researchers in the Houston area. 3. Media Reports on Purge by NIH and FBI Read more Aug 21, 2019 Kansas University Professor Feng “Franklin” Tao became the first academic and scientist of Chinese origin to be indicted in August 2019. He was followed by Professors Anming Hu and Gang Chen, Researcher Dr. Qing Wang, New York Police Department Officer Baimadajie Angwang, a group of five STEM researchers and students from China, and others. The year 2020 saw the injustice inflicted by the government shifting and intensifying its profiling of scientists, most of them of Chinese origin, for “research integrity” in the name of national security. 4. Shift to Profiling Scientists of Chinese Origin Read more Feb 27, 2020 From generation to generation, the Asian Pacific American communities have been resilient in fighting against discrimination and protecting their civil rights. It is a continuing effort that transcends the China Initiative, which again confirms the commitment and determination of the communities from elected officials to organizations and individuals. 5. Communities Respond with Resilience Read more Jan 5, 2021 On January 5, 2021, a coalition of organizations and individuals wrote to President-elect Joe Biden, requesting him to end the China Initiative and take steps to combat racial profiling. Two weeks later, the indictment of MIT Professor Gang Chen ignited the “We Are All Gang Chen” movement. Between September 2020 and June 2021, five organizations partnered to produce a series of five educational webinars to raise nationwide awareness about the China Initiative. 6. Letter to President-Elect Biden to End China Initiative Read more Jun 30, 2021 Following a public campaign led by Maryland State Senator Susan Lee and a coalition in February 2022, Reps. Jamie Raskin and Judy Chu hosted a Democratic Member Roundtable on “Researching while Chinese American: Ethnic Profiling, Chinese American Scientists and a New American Brain Drain” in June 2022. It was the first congressional hearing where the profiling of Chinese American scientists and the damage to American leadership in science and technology were heard. 7. Congressional Roundtable on Racial Profiling Read more Jul 22, 2021 The abrupt dismissal of visa fraud and other charges against five scientists from China in five separate “China Initiative” cases and the FBI reports from the discovery process exposed the weaknesses of the prosecutions, dissension in the FBI’s own ranks, and exaggerated claims of national security risks by the government. 8. Five Visa Fraud Cases Dismissed Read more Sep 8, 2021 A group of 177 Stanford University faculty members sent an open letter to US Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, requesting that he terminate the China Initiative. The campaign became national and continued until the end of the China Initiative. More than 3,100 faculty, researchers, and scientists representing over 230 institutions from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico co-signed the letters. 9. Stanford Faculty Starts Nationwide Campaign to End China Initiative Read more Sep 15, 2021 Multiple media reports the China Initiative as unraveling and out of control after cases that were sensationally publicized early on by the government began to be dismissed or acquitted in courts rapidly in a span of several months. 10. The China Initiative Unraveling and Out of Control Read more Dec 2, 2021 On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published two investigative reports on the China Initiative as newly appointed Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen was conducting a review of the initiative. 11. MIT Technology Review Investigative Reports Read more Feb 23, 2022 Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen announced the end of the China Initiative. The 1,210 days of the Initiative were extremely damaging to individuals and their families, as well as the Asian American and scientific communities. The end of the China Initiative is a welcomed start to correct the harms it caused. APA Justice is committed to continue its work to address racial profiling and seek justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American communities. 12. China Initiative Ends Read more BACKGROUND A pattern of racial profiling against Chinese American scientists began to emerge in 2015. In a relatively short time span, four naturalized American citizens in three separate situations were indicted for one of most serious crimes related to espionage and trade secrets that carried heavy penalties in prison terms and fines. These individuals worked in diverse fields - private industry, federal government, and academia respectively. All three cases were subsequently dismissed or dropped without apology or further explanation. This is highly unusual because the Department of Justice (DOJ) prides itself on its mission of prosecuting criminal cases. Conviction rate is a key measure of success and performance. Annual statistical reports show that the overall DOJ conviction rate in all criminal prosecutions has been over 90% every year since 2001. The rate for espionage-related charges is expected to be much higher than average due to its serious nature and impact on the accused. A combination of human mistakes, implicit bias, social stigmatism, explicit prejudice, and racial profiling may explain why some of these innocent individuals were wrongly prosecuted in the first place. However, the damages done to them and their families are undeniably devastating. The legal cost to defend oneself is high, easily run into hundreds of thousands of dollars and higher. Reputations and careers built on many years of accomplishments would be forever lost or stalled in an instant, deeming them to become unemployed and unemployable. The emotional shock and fear leave traumatic scars on the individuals and family members for the rest of their lives. In effect, an innocent person, once wrongly accused, can seldom be made whole again. There are other individual victims whose cases were also dismissed or found not guilty. Some agreed to much lesser infractions than the original charges to avoid financial ruins. Our nation loses their talents and contributions to the society when they are forced to leave the country. These cases are almost never reported by the government. This website dedicates one webpage each for impacted individuals, many of them are heroically speaking out and fighting back for justice and fairness. Sherry Chen and Professor Xiaoxing Xi are the raison d'être for APA Justice. If you know of similar cases, please contact us at contact@apajustice.org . Jumpstart your knowledge on The China Initiative A 7-minute video aimed to educate the general public on increasing discrimination faced by Chinese scientists under the Department of Justice's China Initiative and to highlight the many scientific accomplishments they have contributed to U.S. institutions of higher education and research. Watch Interview of Dr. David Ho, Columbia University’s Clyde and Helen Wu Professor of Medicine; Michael A. Szonyi, Director of the Harvard University Fairbank Center; Catherine X. Pan, head of Dorsey & Whitney’s U.S.-China practice; and Frank Wu, President of Queens College and a Serica Initiative board member, among others. Watch Impacted Persons According to the Department of Justice and two investigative reports by the MIT Technology Review, the “China Initiative” had 77 known cases involving 162 individuals (one of them an entity). Twenty three (23) cases are identified as “Research Integrity” involving academics, researchers, and scientists. Academic Cases Other/Non-China Initiative Cases Read More Item One Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Two Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Three Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Chili Onions Pepperoni Mushrooms Olives Cheese Sort by Read More Item One Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Two Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Read More Item Three Subtitle Goes Here Date File Date: This is a paragraph. Click to edit and add your own text. Add any information you want to share with users. Change the font, size or scale to get the look you want. Chili Onions Pepperoni Mushrooms Olives Cheese Sort by On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published The US crackdown on Chinese economic espionage is a mess. We have the data to show it . According to the report, the US government’s China Initiative sought to protect national security. In the most comprehensive analysis of cases to date, MIT Technology Review reveals how far it has strayed from its goals. Among its major findings are: The DOJ has neither officially defined the China Initiative nor explained what leads it to label a case as part of the initiative The initiative’s focus increasingly has moved away from economic espionage and hacking cases to “research integrity” issues, such as failures to fully disclose foreign affiliations on forms A significant number of research integrity cases have been dropped or dismissed Only about a quarter of people and institutions charged under the China Initiative have been convicted Many cases have little or no obvious connection to national security or the theft of trade secrets Nearly 90% of the defendants charged under the initiative are of Chinese heritage Although new activity appears to have slowed since Donald Trump lost the 2020 US presidential election, prosecutions and new cases continue under the Biden administration The Department of Justice does not list all cases believed to be part of the China Initiative on its webpage and has deleted others linked to the project. Two days after MIT Technology Review requested comment from the DOJ regarding the initiative, the department made significant changes to its own list of cases, adding some and deleting 39 defendants previously connected to the China Initiative from its website. This included several instances where the government had announced prosecutions with great fanfare, only for the cases to fail —including one that was dismissed by a judge after a mistrial. The MIT Technology Review database of 77 "China Initiative" cases is posted online and can be used for interactive analysis. It draws primarily on the press releases that have been added to the DOJ’s China Initiative webpage over the last three years, including those recently removed from its public pages. The MIT Technology Review supplemented this information with court records and interviews with defense attorneys, defendants’ family members, collaborating researchers, former US prosecutors, civil rights advocates, lawmakers, and outside scholars who have studied the initiative. APA Justice provided assistance to verify and validate the 77 "China Initiative" cases before the removal of some cases by DOJ. MIT Technology Review provides a second full report titled We built a database to understand the China Initiative. Then the government changed its records on how the database was built, what DOJ changed in its online report, and how the database is organized, including a statement on transparency and conflict-of-interest. 11/01/2018 - 02/23/2022 1,210 DAYS Endorsers of Stanford Letter Stanford University: 177 University of California Berkeley: 214 Temple University: 167 Princeton University: 198 University of Michigan: 430 Southern Illinois University Faculty Senate: 53 Yale University: 192 University of California Irvine: 92 University of Pennsylvania: 168 Baylor College of Medicine: 219 APA Justice nationwide campaign: 1,209 Total: 3,119 Number of institutions APA Justice nationwide campaign: 231 + Stanford University + University of California Berkeley + Temple University + Princeton University + University of Michigan + Southern Illinois University + Yale University + University of California Irvine + University of Pennsylvania + Baylor College of Medicine Number of states + territories States: 50 + District of Columbia + Puerto Rico Change.org supporters: 244 See University Responses to the China Initiative. On February 23, 2022, the Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the Department of Justice (DOJ), Matthew G. Olsen, announced the end of the “China Initiative,” a program that was meant to address economic espionage but morphed into disproportionately targeting Asian Americans and academic communities for administrative errors and harming academic freedom and open science. While we disagree with Mr. Olsen’s self-assessment that the DOJ did not find racial bias in “China Initiative” cases, we welcome the end of the ill-conceived initiative and DOJ’s openness to listen and respond to community concerns. CHINA INITIATIVE ENDS On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published The US crackdown on Chinese economic espionage is a mess. We have the data to show it . Read full report China Initiative Analysis MIT Technology Review Cases charged under the China Initiative by year Impacted Persons According to the Department of Justice and two investigative reports by the MIT Technology Review, the “China Initiative” had 77 known cases involving 162 individuals (one of them an entity). Twenty three (23) cases are identified as “Research Integrity” involving academics, researchers, and scientists. Find detailed information on Impacted Persons on this page .

Community Responses The AAPI community's responses to AAPI issues. Our watchlist contains all of the most pertinent issues and legislations to the Asian American community. Check it out Our Watchlist See Congress's statements and actions regarding AAPI issues. Explore Congressional Actions Campaign to Oppose The Nomination of Casey Arrowood Read More 11. MIT Technology Review Investigative Reports Read More 9. Stanford Faculty Starts Nationwide Campaign to End China Initiative Read More 6. Letter to President-Elect Biden to End China Initiative Read More ASBMB Protests Racially Motivated Cancellation of Research Grant Read More Top Scientific Organizations Call for Fairer Treatment of Foreign-born Scientists Read More

Frequently Asked Questions How can I donate to APA Justice? You can help support APA Justice through donation by check or online. Please see the Donation page for more details. Tell me about your newsletters. APA Justice began publishing a free periodic newsletter about 4-7 times a month in July 2020. As of January 2026, there have been over 370 issues .

Thank you for supporting APA Justice. To donate online, please visit https://donate.committee100.org/apa-justice/ to contribute to APA Justice through the Committee of 100. To donate by check, please address the check to: APA Justice 28 West 44th Street, Suite 1014, New York, NY 10036 Donate online

Timeline Back to China Initiative Prev Next Table of Contents Overview FBI Director’s Profiling Approach NIH’s Own “China Initiative” Criminalizing China The Ethnic Targeting of Chinese Scientists Links and References Overview On November 1, 2018, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Session announced the launch of the China Initiative to combat national security threats and economic espionage emanating from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). “This Initiative will identify priority Chinese trade theft cases, ensure that we have enough resources dedicated to them, and make sure that we bring them to an appropriate conclusion quickly and effectively.” Sessions said. President Donald Trump fired Sessions less than a week later, but the China Initiative remained in operation for 1,210 days until it was ended by the Joe Biden Administration on February 23, 2022. The Department of Justice (DOJ) had no definition of what constitutes a China Initiative case. DOJ created an online report on what it considered to be Chinese Initiative cases. The online report was last updated on November 19, 2021, three months before the initiative officially ended. According to MIT Technology Review , there have been 77 known China Initiative cases impacting 162 individuals. Based on a comprehensive analysis of the cases, MIT Technology Review concluded that the initiative had increasingly charged academics with “research integrity” issues. Nearly 90% of the defendants charged were of Chinese heritage, lending credence to wide-spread allegations that scientists and researchers of Chinese origin were racially profiled and targeted under the China Initiative despite denials by the government. The DOJ China Initiative cases included only indictments and prosecutions. It did not include investigations or surveillance by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and other federal law enforcement agencies and grant agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH). NIH ran its own China Initiative. By March 23, 2023, a year after the official end of the China Initiative, NIH’s own “China initiative” had upended hundreds of lives and destroyed scores of academic careers. In contrast to the very public criminal prosecutions of academic scientists under the China Initiative, NIH’s version was conducted behind closed doors. FBI Director’s Profiling Approach The first thunder of the New Red Scare came on February 13, 2018, when FBI Director Christopher Wray testified in a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing and targeted all students, scholars and scientists of Chinese origin as a national security threat to the United States. Wray responded to a question in the hearing, “I think in this setting I would just say that the use of nontraditional collectors, especially in the academic setting, whether it’s professors, scientists, students, we see in almost every field office that the FBI has around the country. It’s not just in major cities. It’s in small ones as well. It’s across basically every discipline.” Asian American advocates were outraged by Wray’s presumption that every Chinese professor, scientist, and student was guilty of collecting intelligence for the Chinese government until proven innocent. Conflating the stereotype of “perpetual foreigners” and the loyalty of Asian Americans to the United States, Wray pledged to pursue a “whole-of-society” approach to address the threat of China. His use of the term “non-traditional collectors” for spies parallelled “thousand grains of sand” during the prosecution of Dr. Wen Ho Lee and “fifth column” in referral to Japanese Americans during World War II. Qian Xuesen, also known as Hsue-shen Tsien, a founder of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, became a victim of the Second Red Scare during the Cold War era, facing accusations of “communist sympathies” despite his contributions to American scientific advancement. Fourteen Asian American community organizations wrote to Wray on March 1, 2018, and called for “an opportunity to discuss how well-intentioned public policies might nonetheless lead to troubling issues of potential bias, racial profiling, and wrongful prosecution.” Wray never responded to the letter. References and Links Wikipedia: Qian Xuesen 2020/02/02 The Intercept: The FBI’s China Obsession - The U.S. Government Secretly Spied on Chinese American Scientists, Upending Lives and Paving the Way for Decades of Discrimination 2019/12/31 Bloomberg: As China Anxiety Rises in U.S., Fears of New Red Scare Emerge 2019/07/20 New York Times: A New Red Scare Is Reshaping Washington 2018/03/23 Huffington Post: FBI Director Defends Remarks That Chinese People In U.S. Pose Threats 2018/03/08 Washington Post Opinion: America’s new — and senseless — Red Scare 2018/03/01 14 Coalition Organizations: Coalition letter to FBI Director Wray 2018/03/01 Committee of 100: Community Organizations Call for Meeting with FBI Director Christopher Wray Regarding Profiling of Students, Scholars, and Scientists with Chinese Origins 2018/02/27 Asia Times: FBI director’s grave mistake on targeting Chinese-Americans 2018/02/16 纽约都市新闻网: 华裔议员严厉谴责Rubio和Wray针对中国学生的极端言论 2018/02/15 CAPAC: CAPAC Members on Rubio and Wray’s Remarks Singling Out Chinese Students as National Security Threats 2018/02/14 Inside Higher Ed: The Chinese Student Threat? 2018/02/13 Advancing Justice | AAJC: FBI Director’s Shock Claim: Chinese Students Are a Potential Threat 2018/02/13 U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: Hearing on Global Threats and National Security 2016/05/25 60 Minutes: Collateral Damage 2015/05/10 New York Times: Accused of Spying for China, Until She Wasn’t 2000/09/14 New York Times: Statement by Judge in Los Alamos Case, With Apology for Abuse of Power . 1999/12/11 Washington Post: China Prefers the Sand to the Moles 1964/02/02 New York Times: F.B.I. Chief Warns of Red China Spies NIH’s Own “China Initiative” According to the Science Magazine, Francis Collins, the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sent a missive to more than 10,000 institutions on August 20, 2018, asserting that "threats to the integrity of U.S. biomedical research exist" and highlighted the failure to disclose "substantial resources from other organizations, including foreign governments." Collins wrote that "in the weeks and months ahead you may be hearing from [NIH] regarding … requests about specific … personnel from your institution." Dubbed as NIH’s own “China Initiative,” NIH began sending letters to dozens of major U.S. research universities in March 2019, asking them to provide information about specific faculty members with NIH funding who are believed to have links to foreign governments that NIH did not know about. Universities reportedly scrambled to respond to the unprecedented queries. Some academic administrators worry the exercise could cast a chill over all types of international scientific collaborations. Others fear that the inquiry may become a vehicle to impugn the loyalty of any faculty member—and especially any foreign-born scientists—who maintain overseas ties. At some institutions, every researcher flagged by NIH was Chinese American. The vaguely worded letters did not contain specific accusations, nor did it explain any aspect of the process. By March 23, 2023, a year after the official end of the China Initiative, Science reported that NIH’s “China initiative” has upended hundreds of lives and destroyed scores of academic careers. In contrast to the very public criminal prosecutions of academic scientists under the China Initiative, NIH’s version was conducted behind closed doors. More than one in five of the 246 scientists targeted were banned from applying for new NIH funding for as long as 4 years—a career-ending setback for most academic researchers. And almost two-thirds were removed from existing NIH grants. Some 81% of the scientists cited in the NIH letters identify as Asian, and 91% of the collaborations under scrutiny were with colleagues in China. In only 14 of the 246 cases—a scant 6%—did the institution fail to find any evidence to back up NIH’s suspicions. NIH is by far the largest funder of academic biomedical research in the United States, and some medical centers receive hundreds of millions of dollars annually from the agency. So when senior administrators heard Michael Lauer, NIH deputy director for extramural research, say a targeted scientist “was not welcome in the NIH ecosystem,” they understood immediately what he meant—and that he was expecting action. “If NIH says there’s a conflict, then there’s a conflict, because NIH is always right,” says David Brenner, who was vice chancellor for health sciences at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), in November 2018 when the institution received a letter from Lauer asking it to investigate five medical school faculty members, all born in China. “We were told we have a problem and that it was up to us to fix it.” In a panel discussion hosted by the University of Michigan in March 2024, Professor Ann Chih Lin, asserted that NIH made it clear that if they couldn’t resolve concerns regarding a faculty member and a grant, NIH would not only require universities to repay the grant, but also investigate universities’ entire portfolio of NIH grants. Fearing the loss of grant money, universities often approached the implicated professors and encouraged them to resign voluntarily or retire early. This strategy aimed to avoid a public disciplinary hearing or grievance process, which could bring unwanted attention to the case. Professors involved in such investigations typically refrained from discussing their cases to protect both themselves and the universities, often choosing to depart quietly. References and Links 2024/03/29 University of Michigan News: US universities secretly turned their back on Chinese professors under DOJ’s China Initiative 2023/02/23 Science: Pall of Suspicion 2019/03/01 Science: NIH letters asking about undisclosed foreign ties rattle U.S. universities Criminalizing China The name of China Initiative by itself is problematic. "Using 'China' as the glue connecting cases prosecuted under the Initiative's umbrella creates an overinclusive conception of the threat and attaches a criminal taint to entities that possess 'China-ness,' based on PRC nationality, PRC national origin, Chinese ethnicity, or other expressions of connections with 'China.,'" Professor Margaret Lewis wrote in her article "Criminalizing China" in 2020. Her article further contends that, when assessed in light of the goals of deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retribution, it is worrisome that the prosecution and punishment of people and entities rests in part on a connection with “China.” A better path is to discard the “China Initiative” framing, focus on cases’ individual characteristics, and enhance the Department of Justice’s interactions with nongovernmental experts. Margaret K. Lewis, Criminalizing China , 111 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 145 (2020). https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol111/iss1/3 The Ethnic Targeting of Chinese Scientists On November 19, 2020, The China Project produced a video titled “ The China Initiative: The ethnic targeting of Chinese scientists and the subsequent brain drain .” (7:30) The China Project talked to lawyers, academics, and victims of the China Initiative for their perspective. Many Chinese and Chinese American researchers feel that the program has placed a target on their back, and that they are being unfairly targeted for their Chinese ethnicity. There are also critics who say the Initiative has done little more than drive talent away from the U.S. Jump to: Overview FBI Director’s Profiling Approach NIH’s Own “China Initiative” Criminalizing China Ethnic Targeting of Chinese Scientists 1. DOJ launched China Initiative November 1, 2018 Timeline Contents Department of Justice: Information About The Department of Justice's China Initiative and A Compilation of China-Related Prosecutions Since 2018 . (last updated November 19, 2021). Margaret K. Lewis, Criminalizing China , 111 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 145 (2020). 2021/12/02 MIT Technology Review: The US crackdown on Chinese economic espionage is a mess. We have the data to show it. 2020/11/19 The China Project: The China Initiative: The Ethnic Targeting of Chinese Scientists and the Subsequent Brain Drain . (video 7:30) 2020/10/30 The China Project: Scientists in the Crosshairs: What should Chinese and Chinese-American researchers do amid U.S. crackdown on ‘China ties’? (video 21:04) 2018/11/07 New York Times: Jeff Sessions Is Forced Out as Attorney General as Trump Installs Loyalist 2018/11/01 Department of Justice: Attorney General Jeff Sessions Announces New Initiative to Combat Chinese Economic Espionage 2018/11/01 Department of Justice: Attorney General Sessions Announces Criminal Enforcement Action and New Initiative to Combat Chinese Economic Espionage (video 36:37) Links and References Timeline Known Cases Impacted Individuals

COVID-19 This item is connected to a text field in your content manager. Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. The numbers Calls per hour 111 Feedback submitted 22 Average feedback per call 21 As of May 28, 2023, there are 33 states known to have introduced some form of alien land and property bills in the current or recent legislative session. A few have passed and signed into state law; some have died; others are still pending. State-by-state links to the legislations and a companion map are provided below as community resources. They are collected from multiple sources including research by APA Justice, Advancing Justice | AAJC, Committee of 100, National Agricultural Law Center, Project South, media reports, and crowdsourcing. Due to the dynamic nature of these developments, we plan to update the information periodically. We anticipate the introduction or continuation of alien land and property bills into future state legislative sessions. Title Oct. 4th 2023 Tracking Bills Read More Latest developments

Xiaofeng Wang 王晓峰 Associate Dean for Research James H. Rudy Professor of Computer Science, Engineering and Informatics Director of Center for Security and Privacy in Informatics, Computing, and Engineering Director of Secure Computing Indiana University Table of Contents Overview Continuing Developments Overview Xiaofeng Wang, a prominent cybersecurity professor at Indiana University Bloomington (IUB), was terminated on March 28, 2025—the same day FBI and Department of Homeland Security agents conducted searches at his homes in Bloomington and Carmel, Indiana. The university has not publicly disclosed the reasons for his dismissal. Professor Wang's wife, Nianli Ma—a library systems analyst at the university—was also terminated on March 24, 2025. The American Association of University Professors' Bloomington chapter has criticized the university's handling of Wang's termination, asserting that it violated due process and university policies. The specific reasons behind the federal investigation remain undisclosed, and the search warrants have been sealed. Efforts have been made to unseal these documents to gain clarity on the situation. Professor Wang is reportedly represented by Attorneys Jason Covert and Jackie Bennett Jr. of Taft Law . References and Links 2025/04/10 Indiana Daily Student: Nianli Ma terminated 4 days before FBI searched her and Xiaofeng Wang’s homes 2025/04/03 The Herald-Times: IU professor Xiaofeng Wang investigated for academic misconduct before FBI search 2025/04/02 Indiana Public Media: Lawyers: Fired cybersecurity expert and wife safe and not charged with a crime 2025/04/02 Indiana Daily Student: IU computer science faculty condemn Xiaofeng Wang’s termination in letter 2025/04/02 WIRED: Cybersecurity Professor Faced China-Funding Inquiry Before Disappearing, Sources Say 2025/04/02 South China Morning Post: Exclusive | US cyber expert Wang Xiaofeng ‘is safe’ after FBI raids, source says 2025/04/02 Indiana Daily Student: IU professor and library analyst face no pending criminal charges, lawyers say 2025/04/02 Reuters: Cybersecurity professor targeted by FBI has not been detained, lawyer says 2025/04/01 South China Morning Post: US cyber expert Wang Xiaofeng took Singapore job before FBI raids: university letter 2025/04/01 Indiana Public Media: Fired prof accused of research misconduct, FBI involvement unclear 2025/03/31 CNBC: Indiana U. fired cybersecurity professor XiaoFeng Wang on day FBI searched his homes: Union 2025/03/31 South China Morning Post: China Initiative 2.0? Raids on scientist Wang Xiaofeng revive spectre from first Trump era 2025/03/31 Indiana Daily Student: Faculty organization alleges IU violated policy in terminating Xiaofeng Wang 2025/03/31 Fox-59: IU faculty protests firing of professor in FBI probe 2025/03/31 WTHR: I U professor allegedly fired after FBI raids on homes in Carmel and Bloomington 2025/03/31 WIRED: Cybersecurity Professor Mysteriously Disappears as FBI Raids His Homes 2025/03/30 ARS Technica: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado 2025/03/30 Indiana Public Media: FBI won’t say why agents searched homes of IU cybersecurity expert 2025/03/29 MSN: Professor Abruptly Fired Amid FBI Raid 2025/03/28 WTHR: FBI seizes boxes of evidence after searching Carmel, Bloomington homes Return to Table of Contents Continuing Developments On April 12, 2025, the Federation of Asian Professor Associations (FAPA) issued a public statement regarding the case of Professor Wang, condemning his termination by IU and raising serious concerns about the erosion of due process, threats to academic freedom, and the ongoing pattern of racial profiling targeting Chinese American scientists. FAPA also sent an open letter to IU President Pamela Whitten. On April 1, 2025, Stanford University cybersecurity scholar Riana Pfefferkorn filed a motion Tuesday to unseal the warrants used to execute searches of IU professor Xiaofeng Wang and Nianli Ma’s homes last week. She filed the motion in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. On April 17, 2025, John E. Childress, the acting U.S. attorney of the Southern District of Indiana argued the search warrants used in the FBI searches of Xiaofeng Wang and Nianli Ma’s homes March 28 should remain sealed in response to the motion to release the warrants. On April 14, 2024, the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) hosted a State of Play Town Hall, in which Nianli Ma, wife of Professor Xiaoxeng Wang spoke about her family situation. AASF and a coalition of organizations and individuals wrote a letter to Rahul Shrivastav, Provost of Indiana University (IU) and requested reinstament of Professor Wang. On April 14, 2025, a GoFundMe campaign for Professor Wang was started by his son, Luke Wang, at https://bit.ly/3E70Vfm . Nianli Ma Professor Wang termination reportedly involved an undisclosed research grant from China in 2017-2018. On April 17, 2025, Day of Action for Higher Ed, IU computer science chair Yuzhen Ye said Professor Wang was not even aware of the grant when university officials asked him about it. “So apparently a researcher in China applied for this grant without his knowledge," she said "So (Wang) explained and also he provided a supporting documentation to IU. I truly believe this really could have unfolded in a very different way if IU administration had chosen to trust its own faculty or give them a fair chance to respond,” Professor Ye said. References and Links Southern District of Indiana: In Re: Motion to Uunseal Search Warrants (1:25-mc-00022) 2025/04/18 Herald-Times: Wife, son of cybersecurity professor Xiaofeng Wang make first comments since FBI raid 2025/04/17 Indiana Daily Student: U.S. attorney argues to keep search warrants for Xiaofeng Wang’s home searches sealed 2025/04/17 Indiana Public Media: IU department chair says Wang didn't know about undisclosed Chinese research grant 2025/04/17 Indian Public Media: Protest groups at IU unite for National Day of Action on higher education 2025/04/16 Guardian: The mysterious firing of a Chinese professor has Asian students on edge: ‘Brings chills to our spines’ 2025/04/15 South China Morning Post: ‘It hurts deeply’: Nianli Ma, wife of cyber expert Xiaofeng Wang, speaks up over FBI raids 2025/04/14 WIRED: A Cybersecurity Professor Disappeared Amid an FBI Search. His Family Is ‘Determined to Fight’ 2025/04/12 FAPA: Open Letter to Pamela Whitten, President, Indiana University 2025/04/12 FAPA: Public Statement on the Case of Dr. Xiaofeng Wang 2025/04/02 Indiana Daily Student: Stanford scholar files motion to unseal warrants used to search homes of Xiaofeng Wang 2025/03/31 AAUP IU Bloomington Chapter: Open Letter to Rahul Shrivastav, Provost, Indiana University Return to Table of Contents Previous Item Next Item

Warrantless Surveillance This item is connected to a text field in your content manager. Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. The numbers Calls per hour 111 Feedback submitted 22 Average feedback per call 21 As of May 28, 2023, there are 33 states known to have introduced some form of alien land and property bills in the current or recent legislative session. A few have passed and signed into state law; some have died; others are still pending. State-by-state links to the legislations and a companion map are provided below as community resources. They are collected from multiple sources including research by APA Justice, Advancing Justice | AAJC, Committee of 100, National Agricultural Law Center, Project South, media reports, and crowdsourcing. Due to the dynamic nature of these developments, we plan to update the information periodically. We anticipate the introduction or continuation of alien land and property bills into future state legislative sessions. Title Oct. 4th 2023 Tracking Bills Read More Latest developments

A group of prominent leaders in biomedical research warn that recent government actions with respect to Chinese scientists in the U.S. could threaten U.S. leadership in biomedical science. August 21, 2019 On August 21, 2019, a group of 150 prominent leaders in U.S. academic and industrial biomedical research and drug development published a letter titled " Chinese scientists and US leadership in the life sciences ," warning that recent actions by government agencies and universities with respect to Chinese scientists in the U.S. could threaten U.S. leadership in biomedical science. "We, the undersigned, are leaders in U.S. academic and industrial biomedical research and drug development. We are concerned that recent actions by government agencies and universities with respect to Chinese scientists in the U.S. could threaten U.S. leadership in biomedical science. Recently, some scientists from China, or American-born of Chinese heritage, have been summarily dismissed from their university positions, creating a climate of fear and uncertainty in our biomedical communities. Let us be clear: we must absolutely guard against foreign espionage and IP theft, and prosecute those who engage in it, whatever their origins. At the same time, actions that more broadly limit collaboration between Chinese and American scientists and companies would be deleterious to our national interests; so too would limitations on American residents of Chinese origin receiving government research funding or being employed by the NIH. In military wars between national adversaries, leaders often vilify “the other.” Our “war” unifies an international community of medical researchers to fight a common adversary, disease: cancers, immune diseases, Alzheimer’s disease, infections, to name just a few. Vilifying or excluding any group as “the other” limits our ability to win this war. The United States’ unique constitution as a nation of immigrants has been fundamental to our world leadership in biomedical research and drug development. Our nation most prolifically attracts the best, most diverse talent from the entire world. This has enriched our economy and society. As a case in point, our preliminary research indicates that, since 1999, over 400,000 US patents have been issued to inventors of Chinese descent, and approximately 28% of U.S. biomedical science publications in 2018 included an author of Chinese descent. An atmosphere of intimidation will encourage many outstanding scientists of Chinese origin to leave the US or never to come. In addition, scientists from other countries who are working in the U.S. cannot fail to get the message that they may well be next. We also note that the vast majority of the results of academic biomedical research are not secret; their publication and open exchange are the cornerstone of our success against our common enemy of human disease and suffering. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.” We support the opinions recently published by the editors of Nature, Nature Biotechnology and by former NIH Director Elias Zerhouni , and advocate for measured policies that will both protect U.S. intellectual property and continue to foster the diversity and collaboration that fuel our ability to advance science and cure disease. At a minimum, universities must effectively communicate and consistently apply their rules governing scientific collaborations and IP obligations, and they, as well as government agencies, must clearly justify their actions when they accuse scientists of malfeasance or seek to dismiss them from their positions. Ronald Reagan said, “We lead the world, because unique among nations, we draw our people, our strength from every country and every corner of the world,” and, “If we ever close our door to new Americans, our leadership in the world will soon be lost.” Nowhere are these thoughts more pertinent than in biomedical science. If we are to prevail in humanity’s common quest to conquer disease, our surest route is to include any person able to contribute, regardless of country of origin, religion, race, gender, or other identity. The U.S. biomedical community stands for the principles of diversity and unity embedded in the founding principles of our country, without which our leadership indeed will soon be lost." Read the original letter here for all the signatories. A group of prominent leaders in biomedical research warn that recent government actions with respect to Chinese scientists in the U.S. could threaten U.S. leadership in biomedical science. Previous Next Pharmaceutical Chiefs and Scientists Support Chinese Researchers Living in ‘Climate of Fear’

The China Initiative This item is connected to a text field in your content manager. Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. The numbers Calls per hour 111 Feedback submitted 22 Average feedback per call 21 As of May 28, 2023, there are 33 states known to have introduced some form of alien land and property bills in the current or recent legislative session. A few have passed and signed into state law; some have died; others are still pending. State-by-state links to the legislations and a companion map are provided below as community resources. They are collected from multiple sources including research by APA Justice, Advancing Justice | AAJC, Committee of 100, National Agricultural Law Center, Project South, media reports, and crowdsourcing. Due to the dynamic nature of these developments, we plan to update the information periodically. We anticipate the introduction or continuation of alien land and property bills into future state legislative sessions. Title Oct. 4th 2023 Tracking Bills Read More Latest developments