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

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

Newsletter - #176 4/17 Roundtable; Red Scare/McCarthyism; Texas; ISSCO Videos/Photos; Non-Random Surveys #176 4/17 Roundtable; Red Scare/McCarthyism; Texas; ISSCO Videos/Photos; Non-Random Surveys In This Issue #176 2023/04/17 Roundtable on a National Alert Network Fight Back the Return of the Red Scare and McCarthyism Chinese Americans Fight for Their Place in Texas Online Videos and Photos of the ISSCO 30th Anniversary Conference "Inference Using Non-Random Samples? Stop Right There!" 2023/04/17 Roundtable on a National Alert Network WHEN: Monday, April 17, 2023, 7:00 pm ET/4:00 pm PT WHAT: Online Roundtable DESCRIPTION: Inaugural roundtable to establish the purpose and functions of a national media alert network and strike teams to assertively address immediate xenophobic challenges to our freedoms and longer-term proactive actions to ensure fairness and justice for all, including the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) and immigrant communities. REGISTRATION: This is an event by invitation only to guests and official representative(s) of AAPI organizations. Members at the Roundtable will be sent a panelist link. Others please register at http://bit.ly/3KvlMI8 Fight Back the Return of the Red Scare and McCarthyism According to a report by the Los Angeles Times on April 9, 2023, the far-rightring site Daily Caller, co-founded by Fox News showman Tucker Carlson , published a hit piece devoid of damning facts, heavy on innuendo and liberally sprinkled with the words "alleged" and "allegedly," that painted former Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and Walter Wang as dangerous stooges of the Chinese Communist Party. Walter Wang, a Taiwanese immigrant, is chief executive of Los Angeles-based pipe manufacturer JM Eagle and a longtime American citizen.Wang 's friends and close business associates know better than to believe the story, "but the people who are not close to me and don't know me well are going to think of me now in a negative light. It could really hurt my reputation." The Garcetti piece also lit into Dominic Ng , Chief Executive of Pasadena-based East West Bank. And previous Daily Caller stories have taken aim at Frank Wu , the president of Queen's College, City University of New York, and Asian Americans involved with the mainstream news outlet the China Project. As tensions rise between the governments of the United States and China, the Daily Caller has leaned into narratives with a similar theme: Chinese and Taiwanese Americans with any connections to China are probably up to some unAmerican activities."If every Chinese American in a photo with any Chinese official is suspect, you're talking about every successful Chinese person," said Frank Wu, "this is about whether or not you have an Asian face."Wu himself became a target of accusations by the Daily Caller last December. That story went after an English language news site called the China Project. No solid facts underpin the innuendo. The article named Wu and other ethnic Asians who sit on the China Project's advisory board. They "appear to belong," the Daily Caller said, to a group called the Committee of 100. Wu says he is in fact a proud members of the committee, which was founded by architect I.M. Pei and cellist Yo-Yo Ma and comprises prominent Chinese Americans who work together to address political, cultural and economic issues between the U.S. and China.Wu, Ng, and Wang see the articles as part of a poisonous campaign to smear political opponents, an approach that pairs McCarthy-era Red Scare tactics with anti-Asian racism.At the same time, all three say they enjoy powerful positions that protect them to some extent from the worst forms of racism.Asian Americans in general have been known to keep a low profile in politics, but it is time to speak up. "We can't just be talking among ourselves in the Asian community, the outreach has to be broader. I'm worrying about being the silent majority," Ng said."We have to fight this," said Wang, who is contemplating a lawsuit. "If we don't fight it, who will?" Read the Los Angeles Times report: http://bit.ly/3GqwM8I Chinese Americans Fight for Their Place in Texas According to a report by the Texas Tribune on April 3, 2023, a mid-January Twitter post by Governor Greg Abbott alerted Chinese Americans across Texas that their rights might be trampled as state lawmakers rushed to burnish their geopolitical credentials.On January 15, the Republican governor told his 1 million followers he was ready to sign into law Texas Senate Bill 147 that would ban “citizens, governments & entities” of China, Iran, North Korea and Russia from purchasing land in the state, in effect blocking some immigrants from becoming homeowners.The bill restricting land ownership was followed by kindred proposals to ban international college students from those same countries and to cut off Texans’ access to TikTok and another social media platform that’s become crucial for the Chinese diaspora living in the state to communicate with family in China.As the Legislature’s work has ramped up, the political headwinds have drafted Chinese Americans into defending their foothold in a state where many have lived for decades, and where Asian Americans have reliably made up the fastest-growing segment of population for years. They’ve grown fearful of a legislative culture that could feed challenges to the rights of Asian Texans, as well as Texans from the other targeted countries. “You can target foreign governments, you can target [the] foreign Chinese Communist Party, but you have to separate that from the individuals that are already in this country and protected by the Constitution,” said Hugh Li , president of the Austin Chinese-American Network and a naturalized citizen of 18 years. “This is our land too. This is our home too. So for the Texas Legislature to want to pass these kinds of bills targeting us and strip away our rights, it’s just not right.”More recently, House Bill 2206 was introduced to ban social media platforms “developed or provided” by entities in the four countries. The social media bill echoes federal efforts to scrutinize popular platforms like TikTok and WeChat over security concerns related to China’s access to Americans' data.The proposals have left it to Chinese Americans to delineate for lawmakers that their lives in Texas exist far apart from geopolitical considerations. At a House hearing in March, a contingent of Chinese Americans waited more than six hours to testify against the legislation that would ban social media platforms, detailing how they rely on WeChat to stay in touch with family. They held up screenshots of video chats between grandparents and grandchildren. One Texan grew emotional as they described how the bill would sever the “bridge for emotional connection” for many Chinese Americans.WeChat is used by 1.3 billion people every month. In China, the platform is reportedly heavily censored and serves as an instrument for mass government surveillance. In households across the state, however, Chinese Americans primarily rely on the messaging and calling tools available through WeChat to connect with family members and friends back in China, where the use of the app is ubiquitous and where other social media or messaging platforms like Facebook and WhatsApp are banned.In 58 pages of testimony submitted in writing to the committee, Texans described WeChat as an “indispensable lifeline connecting us to our families, friends, and culture.” Some described how the use of WeChat in the U.S. has grown into an important tool for businesses connecting with supplies overseas. It was crucial for Chinese restaurants fighting to stay afloat at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s used by day cares to send notifications to parents and by community groups to distribute news, notifications and even weather warnings that otherwise would not be translated from English. The app even serves as a platform for Bible studies among Chinese-speaking churches.Others raised claims of unconstitutionality and questioned why Chinese Americans would be targeted in what they described as an affront to their First Amendment and equal protection rights. Federal courts blocked the Trump administration’s 2020 efforts to block TikTok and WeChat in the United States through executive orders, though the effort has more recently gained bipartisan support in Congress, where national security concerns have reverberated among lawmakers from both parties. Some described how the use of WeChat in the U.S. has grown into an important tool for businesses connecting with supplies overseas. It was crucial for Chinese restaurants fighting to stay afloat at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s used by day cares to send notifications to parents and by community groups to distribute news, notifications and even weather warnings that otherwise would not be translated from English. The app even serves as a platform for Bible studies among Chinese-speaking churches.Others raised claims of unconstitutionality and questioned why Chinese Americans would be targeted in what they described as an affront to their First Amendment and equal protection rights. Federal courts blocked the Trump administration’s 2020 efforts to block TikTok and WeChat in the United States through executive orders, though the effort has more recently gained bipartisan support in Congress, where national security concerns have reverberated among lawmakers from both parties. “It’s just a reminder that the place of immigrants in this country and this state is so tenuous, and it can all be taken away so easily,” she said.Read the Texas Tribune report: http://bit.ly/40RvbRi Online Videos and Photos of the ISSCO 30th Anniversary Conference ISSCO, the International Society for the Study of Chinese Overseas, was established in 1992. On November 11-12, 2022, ISSCO convened its 30th Anniversary Conference in San Francisco.Five videos from the plenary sessions of the conference are online: Keynote by Mae Ngai and Welcome (1:22:08). Introduction: Lok SIU; Welcome: Raka RAY, LIN Rupeng, LI Minghuan, WANG Gungwu, and Ling-chi WANG; Keynote: Mae M. NGAI Racial Profiling and Discrimination against Chinese American Scientists and Engineers (1:39:06). Speakers: Sherry CHEN, Xiaoxing XI, Gang CHEN, and Jeremy S. WU; Moderator: Lillian K. SING The Pandemic and Anti-Asian Violence in the U.S. (1:30:43). Welcome: Lok SIU; Speakers: Russell JEUNG, John WALSH, and Cynthia CHOI, Moderator: Henry DER Changing US-China Relations and Their Impact on Chinese in the U.S. and Elsewhere (1:27:43). Speakers: Julie TANG, Gordon CHANG, K.J. NOH, and George KOO; Moderator: Don TOW; Concluding remarks: Lok SIU ISSCO Founders Roundtable (54:24). Moderator: Madeline HSU; Slideshow by: Wei LI; Speakers: Ling-chi WANG, Karen HARRIS, Emmanuel MA MUNG, and Teresita ANG SEE An album of photos from the conference is available here: https://bit.ly/3mj3py2 . If you would like to use the photos for any purpose, please contact the photographer Joyce Xi at joyceyxi11@gmail.com . Joyce can also provide higher-resolution files. "Inference Using Non-Random Samples? Stop Right There!" Surveys are commonly used to measure the current state of affairs or the opinions of a group of people. One of the most significant scientific innovations at the end of the nineteenth century is the introduction of probability-based or random sampling. According to the Significance Magazine in October 2021 ,"statistical inference is a powerful concept. Among other things, it allows us to infer information about a population based on a sample of data from that population. To make appropriate inferences from sample to population, certain pre-conditions need to be met. One of these pre-conditions is that data come from a random sample." Incredibly, a small random sample of say 1,000 individuals would allow statistical inference to be made about the Chinese American population of about 5.5 million within some margin of measurable sampling error.However, random surveys can be costly, laborious, and difficult to conduct. Non-random surveys are also conducted, but the scope of inference is limited to the survey respondents. The temptation to go beyond this boundary is strong. The Significance article observes that inferential statistics should not be used in non-random studies. "However, in many cases, they are. A lack of awareness of the need for random sampling among researchers leads them to go through the motions... Even when researchers themselves do know this, they can find themselves compelled to perform inference by ignorant referees.""in short, if we do not start with a random sample, turning what we have into one is challenging or even impossible. In such cases, we should accept the hard truth that statistical inference is not possible. We must simply report what the data show - and refuse to push them statistically further," the Significance article concludes.In a separate article by Nature in December 2021 which examined the estimates of first-dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake in US adults from 9 January to 19 May 2021, it was shown "how a survey of 250,000 respondents can produce an estimate of the population mean that is no more accurate than an estimate from a simple random sample of size 10. Our central message is that data quality matters more than data quantity, and that compensating the former with the latter is a mathematically provable losing proposition." Next time you see the release of a survey and its results, you may want to look deeper into how the inferences are made on the respondents only or an entire population. Subscribe to The APA Justice Newsletter Complete this simple form at https://bit.ly/2FJunJM to subscribe. Please share it with those who wish to be informed and join the fight. View past newsletters here: https://bit.ly/APAJ_Newsletters . Back View PDF April 10, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Academics, elected officials, and civil rights groups across the country are raising concerns about the nomination of Casey Arrowood to be US Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee. July 29, 2022 Sign the campaign to oppose Arrowood's nomination The White House announced the nomination of Mr. Casey Arrowood to be US Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee on July 29, 2022. The Senate Judiciary Committee logged the nomination as PN2444 on August 1, 2022. Academics, elected officials, civil rights groups, and community organizations across the country have raised grave concerns about this nomination - It will further erode public trust in our judicial system and increase the chilling effect on U.S. science and technology. Mr. Arrowood was the lead prosecutor of University of Tennessee Professor Anming Hu , an internationally-renown nanotechnology expert and the first academic to go to trial under the now-defunct “ China Initiative. ” Court testimonies and documents show that Professor Hu was subject to a two-year Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) investigation started by a Google search , not a criminal predicate. Professor Hu was fired by the University of Tennessee at Knoxville based on misleading and false information provided by the government. When the false allegation that Professor Hu spied for China could not be supported by facts and evidence, he was pressed to spy on China for the U.S. government. After Professor Hu refused, Mr. Arrowood mounted a wire fraud case against Professor Hu. The jury deadlocked, and a mistrial was declared. On June 17, 2021, three members of the House Judiciary Committee, Reps. Ted Lieu, Mondaire Jones, and Pramila Jayapal, referred the case to the Inspector General at the Department of Justice for review out of concerns of alleged misconduct of the FBI in Professor Hu’s case. Mr. Arrowood’s wrongful prosecution of Professor Hu betrayed the public trust and confidence we all place in our judicial system. According to a media report , a member of the all-white jury entered the 2021 trial assuming that the government handled the case with honesty and integrity. At the end of the mistrial, she concluded publicly that it was “the most ridiculous case” and “if this is who is protecting America, we’ve got problems.” Instead of reviewing his weak case and acting in the interests of justice, Mr. Arrowood pursued a retrial of Professor Hu. In the order to acquit Professor Hu of all charges in the indictment, Judge Thomas Varlan ruled that the government's evidence, even if given in the light most favorable to the government, would be clearly insufficient for a rational jury to convict Professor Hu of the crimes alleged. Despite the judge's ruling, the unjust prosecution forever changed the lives of Professor Hu and his family. To this day, Professor Hu describes that period as "the darkest time of [his] life" as he and his family endured financial instability, traumas, family separation, and a long battle for justice. The nomination of Mr. Arrowood is an affront to the Asian American, immigrant, and scientific communities. It opens a new wound when we still need to heal from years of prosecution and targeting of Asian Americans and immigrants during and before the "China Initiative." Our communities continue to work towards justice and ensuring substantive reforms to end the targeting and profiling of Asian Americans and immigrants. Mr. Arrowood demonstrated his poor judgment, wasted valuable taxpayers’ dollars, failed to uphold justice and fairness, and eroded public trust. His wrongful prosecution of Professor Hu, not once but twice, is deplorable and an embarrassment to our nation. In an exclusive interview with Tennessee Lookout on August 11, 2022, Professor Hu called for President Joe Biden to withdraw the nomination of Mr. Arrowood. “My case was a case of wrongful prosecution, and I believe (if Arrowood is confirmed) similar things will happen again and will damage long term the U.S. (government’s) reputation,” Professor Hu said. “If you do something wrong, you should have consequences. Instead, (Arrowood) is getting rewarded. It is very unfair. I do not think this is a reasonable nomination.” On August 20, 2022, Professor Hu and his family wrote to the White House requesting President Biden to rescind the nomination of Mr. Arrowood. Professor Hu cited four explanations for his objection: As the leading prosecutor, Mr. Arrowood should have stopped this wrongful investigation and never brought this case forward for prosecution. As an Assistant U.S. Attorney, Mr. Arrowood himself did not understand the law that he was prosecuting. This wrongful prosecution created a strong chilling effect among the Chinese American community. This nomination has harmed the reputation of the U.S. government. APA Justice , Asian American Scholar Forum , Tennessee Chinese American Alliance , and United Chinese Americans launched this nationwide campaign to support Professor Hu and oppose the nomination of Mr. Arrowood. We give voice to Asian Americans and immigrants, the scientific and academic community, and to the impacted persons and their families. We call for the White House to withdraw the nomination, and the Senate Judiciary Committee to take no action on the nomination before a thporugh investigation and a hearing have been completed. We will continue to collect organizational and individual co-signers until there is an end to the nomination of Mr. Arrowood. Please help spread the word if you have already signed on and fill out the form here if you have not yet done so: https://bit.ly/OpposeArrowoodNomination Please help spread the word about this campaign widely. We also encourage organizations and individuals to send their own letters directly to the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee. Email contact@apajustice.org if you have any questions or comments. Note : Organizers of the campaign retain the right to decide on the final co-signers to the letters. Please sign on to the campaign here: https://bit.ly/OpposeArrowoodNomination 2022/11/10 Committee of 100: Committee of 100 Expresses Concerns Over Mr. Casey Arrowood Being Nominated to Serve as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee. http://bit.ly/3EBDpEy 2022/11/06 Knox News: 'I want him voted down': Professor wrongly accused of spying fights prosecutor's promotion. https://bit.ly/3UDuYgZ 2022/09/06 Coalition letter to President Biden requesting the withdrawal of the nomination of Casey Arrowood. https://bit.ly/3KTWGTm 2022/09/06 Coalition letter to Senate Judiciary Committee requesting no action on the nomination of Casey Arrowood before thorough review. https://bit.ly/3KSy79l 2022/09/02 Department of Justice: Response to June 17, 2021, Request for Investigation. https://bit.ly/3rISqgJ 2022/08/31 Anming Hu letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee requesting rejection of Arrowood nomination. https://bit.ly/3RezeT6 2022/08/24 APA Justice Newsletter: Special Edition on the Campaign to Oppose the Nomination of Mr. Casey Arrowood. https://bit.ly/3ckMgPI 2022/08/22 Draft letter to President Biden to withdraw the nomination of Casey Arrowood. https://bit.ly/3T7yeRN 2022/08/20 Anming Hu letter to the White House requesting withdrawal of Arrowood nomination. https://bit.ly/3wizTum 2022/08/31 Tennessee Lookout: Asian American groups urge rejection of nominee for U.S. Attorney in Tennessee’s Eastern District . https://bit.ly/3CIVj7T 2022/08/11 Tennessee Lookout: Falsely accused University of Tennessee professor: Biden should rescind U.S. Attorney nomination. https://bit.ly/3C1YiYv Academics, elected officials, and civil rights groups across the country are raising concerns about the nomination of Casey Arrowood to be US Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Previous Next Campaign to Oppose The Nomination of Casey Arrowood

Newsletter - #321 4/7 Meeting; SwAA/AASF Updates; Bill to Ban Chinese Students; Nature Op-Ed; Lawsuits+ #321 4/7 Meeting; SwAA/AASF Updates; Bill to Ban Chinese Students; Nature Op-Ed; Lawsuits+ In This Issue #321 · 2025/04/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Introduction to Stand with Asian Americans · Updates from the Asian American Scholar Forum · Bill to Ban All Chinese Students Introduced in Congress · Nature : Trump 2.0: An Assault on Science Anywhere is an Assault on Science Everywhere · Recent Court Rulings Against Trump's Executive Actions · News and Activities for the Communities 2025/04/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, April 7, 2025, starting at 1:55 pm ET.In addition to updates by Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC, and Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), invited and confirmed speakers are: · Mark Takano (Invited), First Vice Chair, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC); Member, U.S. House of Representatives · Erwin Chemerinsky , Dean, Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley · Cindy Tsai , Interim President, Committee of 100 · X. Edward Guo , President, Asian American Academy of Science and Engineering (AAASE) 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 . *****The March 2025 APA Justice monthly meeting summary is posted at https://bit.ly/4iOexLD . Past monthly meeting summaries are posted at https://bit.ly/4hyOV4i .We thank the following speakers for their remarks and update reports: · 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) · Jessica Chen Weiss , Founding Faculty Director of the Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs (ACF), SAIS, Johns Hopkins University · Michelle Lee , President and General Counsel, and Brian Pang , Chief Operating Officer and Head of Partnerships, Stand with Asian Americans · Clay Zhu , Co-Founder, Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance 华美维权同盟 (CALDA) Introduction to Stand with Asian Americans Michelle Lee serves as the President and General Counsel of Stand with Asian Americans (SwAA), while Brian Pang is the Chief Operating Officer and Head of Partnerships.During the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 3, 2025, Michelle and Brian introduced SwAA – a nonprofit launched in 2021 to empower Asian Americans in asserting their civil rights and liberties. The organization focuses on actively combating workplace discrimination by providing legal representation and strategic litigation against employment injustices. SwAA aims to drive systemic change and ensure accountability through legal action, education, and community support. Mike Roberts is SwAA’s new Legal Director. SwAA was founded in response to rising anti-Asian discrimination, particularly after the 2021 Atlanta Spa shootings. It published an open letter in the Wall Street Journal titled “Enough.” The letter went viral, signed by over 9,000 leaders in business, entertainment, sports, and government, including former Presidents of the United States. SwAA’s leadership have all experienced discrimination at work and in their businesses; they have all taken action and obtained favorable outcomes. The organization initially engaged in broad advocacy efforts, including anti-hate initiatives, civic empowerment, and corporate activism. Over time, recognizing the limited resources and lack of dedicated support for workplace discrimination cases, SwAA refined its mission in 2023 to concentrate on employment and economic justice. SwAA combats workplace discrimination through three main pillars: · Legal Representation – Building a legal team to strategically select and litigate cases that expose and challenge workplace discrimination. · Community and Education – Providing resources such as know-your-rights workshops, social media awareness campaigns, and a monthly invite-only support group for those experiencing discrimination. · Policy and Advocacy – Partnering with civil rights organizations, law schools, and legal clinics to advocate for legislative and policy reforms at state and federal levels. Despite its impact, SwAA faces challenges in securing funding. Traditional corporate and government sponsors often lack awareness of the importance of workplace discrimination efforts for Asian Americans. To operate effectively, SwAA estimates an annual budget of $1 million and seeks support from donors, partners, and community networks. SwAA encourages individuals to report workplace discrimination through its online portal, participate in its programs, and share its mission within their networks. The organization remains committed to advocating for Asian Americans in employment across all industries, including government, academia, and private sectors. For support or involvement, SwAA can be reached at · https://standwithasianamericans.com/ · hello@standwithasianamericans.com · (415)-234-0710, and · Social media platforms: Facebook , Twitter , Instagram , LinkedIn Michelle and Brian’s presentation is available here: https://bit.ly/4iKZgL0 Updates from the Asian American Scholar Forum During the APA Justice monthly meeting on March 3, 2025, Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director of Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), provided an update on AASF’s key activities and legislative monitoring efforts. AASF will host its annual multi-day conference at Stanford University in July, culminating on July 26 with the recognition of Nobel laureates and distinguished researchers. This event, often referred to as the "Science Oscars" for Asian Americans, aims to celebrate contributions to American science and foster community engagement. AASF remains committed to empowering scholars through networking and recognition, ensuring a lasting impact across administrations. AASF will also host a virtual town hall to discuss pressing legislative issues affecting the scholar community in 2025. AASF is actively monitoring legislative developments that could impact Asian American scholars, including the Deterrent Act, which may require reporting of all foreign gifts, and the potential reinstatement of the China Initiative, which has been criticized for racial profiling. The organization is also concerned about the reintroduction of the CCP Act, which could disproportionately target academics with ties to China under national security scrutiny. Another area of concern is the Alien Enemies Act, which could lead to unfair targeting of Chinese American scientists, raising fears of history repeating itself. AASF has supported the Korematsu Bill package to acknowledge and prevent injustices similar to the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II. AASF remains vigilant against legislation that could promote racial profiling and discrimination under the guise of national security. AASF is expanding its support initiatives for scholars by launching naturalization clinics to assist with U.S. citizenship applications, thereby providing greater legal protections. It will also offer "Know Your Rights" sessions with attorneys on legal matters, including employment and criminal law. Recognizing the mental health challenges faced by scholars due to political and professional pressures, AASF is increasing its resources to support mental well-being. AASF also celebrated a major legal victory in the case of Yin v. Diaz, which helped prevent discriminatory policies from spreading nationwide. Through these efforts, AASF aims to provide scholars with legal, institutional, and emotional support to navigate an uncertain landscape while advocating for a fair and inclusive academic environment.In addition to its legislative and legal advocacy, AASF is committed to fostering long-term resilience within the academic and scientific communities. By strengthening partnerships with organizations such as APA Justice, Stop AAPI Hate, and national legal teams, AASF seeks to amplify collective efforts against discriminatory policies and practices. It continues to emphasize the importance of representation, community engagement, and policy reform to safeguard the rights and contributions of Asian American scholars. Looking ahead, AASF remains dedicated to ensuring that academic talent is nurtured and protected, reinforcing the U.S.'s competitive edge in science and technology while upholding principles of fairness and inclusivity. Bill to Ban All Chinese Students Introduced in Congress According to AP News and other media reports, on March 14, 2025, a group of six House Republicans led by Rep. Riley Moore (R-WV) introduced legislation aimed at banning all Chinese nationals from studying in the United States under the pretext of "national security" concerns.The bill, H.R. 2147 , also known as the "Stop CCP Visas Act," seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to prohibit Chinese students and exchange visitors from obtaining U.S. visas. The proposed Bill would block all Chinese citizens from getting any of three main types of student visas issued by the U.S. – Vocational, Exchange Visitors and Academic Student visas.On March 18, 2025, the Committee of 100 issued the following statement: "America has always thrived by welcoming the brightest minds from around the world. Shutting the door on Chinese students doesn’t just betray our values—it weakens our leadership in science, technology, and innovation,” said Gary Locke , Committee of 100 Chair and former U.S. Ambassador to China. 'The Stop CCP Visas Act is not just exclusionary but self-defeating. We must stand for opportunity, not fear, and ensure that talent and progress continue to flourish in our nation.' "Suggesting that every Chinese student regardless of their background, intentions, or beliefs is a national security threat is not only inaccurate but also fuels xenophobia, discrimination, and hostility toward an entire group of people – including Chinese Americans here in the U.S. Chinese and Chinese American students have long contributed to America’s scientific, technological, and economic progress, and such rhetoric undermines their ability to learn, collaborate, and thrive in an environment free from suspicion and prejudice. Committee of 100 calls on all our nation’s leaders to uphold the American values of fairness, openness, and equal opportunity. America’s strength comes from welcoming diverse talent from all around the world." Related statements and media reports:2025/03/19 NBC News : Chinese students slam GOP bill that would ban them from U.S. schools, say it's ‘new Chinese Exclusion Act’ 2025/03/18 South China Morning Post : Distinguished Chinese-Americans condemn visa veto aimed at students from China 2025/03/18 Committee of 100 Condemns Proposed Bill H.R. 2147 Banning Chinese Student Visas 2025/03/14 Asian American Scholar Forum Cautions Harm to Talent Pipeline By Bill Banning Chinese Student Visas 2025/03/13 Advancing Justice | AAJC Rejects Racist Proposed Bill to Block Issuance of Student Visas to Chinese Nationals Nature : Trump 2.0: An Assault on Science Anywhere is an Assault on Science Everywhere According to an opinion published by Nature on February 25, 2025, US President Donald Trump is taking a wrecking ball to science and to international institutions. The global research community must take a stand against these attacks.In his first month in office, Trump has initiated policies that severely undermine scientific research and international collaboration. Despite calls from the scientific community to strengthen the nation’s legacy in research, his administration has instead implemented sweeping funding cuts, frozen research programs, and imposed restrictive policies that threaten academic freedom. Key federal agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), face drastic budget reductions and staff layoffs, creating uncertainty for researchers and stalling critical public health and environmental initiatives.Internationally, the administration’s withdrawal from global agreements and aid programs has far-reaching consequences. Trump has slashed funding for climate change initiatives, abandoned the Paris Agreement, and signaled an exit from the World Health Organization (WHO), jeopardizing global health efforts. USAID, a crucial source of international aid, has been severely impacted, leaving millions without essential medical and humanitarian support. These actions not only harm global development but also diminish the United States’ leadership in science and diplomacy. In response, scientific organizations and researchers are speaking out against these measures, emphasizing the need to protect academic freedom and research integrity. Legal challenges may overturn some decisions, but the broader trend signals a systematic effort to suppress independent, evidence-based policymaking. Nature calls on the global scientific community to take a stand, support affected researchers, and defend the role of science in shaping public policy. The erosion of scientific progress in the U.S. threatens both national and global prosperity, making collective opposition essential. Recent Court Rulings Against Trump's Executive Actions As of March 23, 2025, the number of lawsuits against President Donald Trump 's executive actions reported by the Just Security Litigation Tracker has grown to 135 with two closed cases.Some of the recent major rulings and related developments: · Birthright Citizenship . At least three courts have issued orders blocking Trump’s attack on birthright citizenship. According to Vox on March 22, 2025, in a brief asking the Supreme Court to narrow these court orders, the Trump administration claims that the word “jurisdiction” actually means “allegiance.” So someone is not a citizen if they do not owe “ primary allegiance to the United States rather than to an ‘alien power .’” · Alien Enemies Act of 1798 and Mass Deportations. On March 22, 2025, the Washington Post reported that James E. Boasberg , chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, expressed doubts about the Trump administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime power, to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members, while also grilling a government attorney about whether officials had disregarded his order not to do so. “Why was this proclamation essentially signed in the dark?” Judge Boasberg said of Trump’s executive order. “Then these people rushed onto planes. It seems to me the only reason to do that is if you know it’s a problem and you want to get them out of the country.” CNN reported that Trump downplayed his involvement in invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, saying that he had not signed the proclamation. “I don’t know when it was signed, because I didn’t sign it,” Trump told reporters on March 21. However, the proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act appears in the Federal Register with Trump’s signature. · Attempt to Deport Indian Postdoctoral Fellow . According to NPR on March 20, 2025, U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles for the Eastern District of Virginia has blocked immigration officials from deporting a Georgetown University professor and postdoctoral scholar. Badar Khan Suri , an Indian national, is the latest scholar to be detained or deported by the Trump administration for their support for Palestinian rights or for criticizing Israel for the war in Gaza. Just like the high-profile arrest of Columbia graduate student Mahmoud Khalil , Suri is being accused by Department of Homeland Security officials of spreading Hamas propaganda. "Ripping someone from their home and family, stripping them of their immigration status, and detaining them solely based on political viewpoint is a clear attempt by President Trump to silence dissent," ACLU of Virginia Senior Immigrants' Rights Attorney Sophia Gregg said in a statement on Suri's case. "That is patently unconstitutional." · Elon Musk's DOGE Access to Social Security Temporarily Blocked . AP News reported that on March 20, 2025, U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland temporarily blocked Elon Musk ’s DOGE from Social Security systems that hold personal data on millions of Americans, calling their work there a “fishing expedition.” The order also requires the team to delete any personally identifiable data in their possession. According to the Washington Post on March 2025, more than a dozen judges have said in more than a dozen cases — and in three major rulings this past week alone — a federal judge has ruled that the administration either has violated the law or has probably done so. The total works out to one such finding about every four days. The cases in which a judge has reached such a ruling span Trump’s efforts to freeze federal funding, fire federal workers, restrict diversity efforts, overturn birthright citizenship, and, most recently, limit transgender rights and deport certain immigrants without legal review. NBC News and multiple media reported that Trump signed an executive order to begin eliminating the federal Department of Education on March 20, 2025. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar 2026/03/26 Policing White Supremacy: The Enemy Within2026/03/26 ACLU Virtual Town Hall: Protect People, Not Power2025/03/30 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/07 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/04/13 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/04/15 China Connections: A Conversation with Emily Feng2025/04/24-26 Committee of 100 Annual Conference and Gala2025/04/27 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2025/05/05 APA Justice Monthly Meeting2025/05/11 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall MeetingVisit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. USCET Is Hiring Interns The U.S.-China Education Trust (USCET) is seeking Program and Communications Interns to join its dynamic team. Interns will provide communication and programmatic support to the Program Associate, Managing Director, and Executive Director, contributing to the implementation of its ongoing programs, social media content, and development of new initiatives addressing critical issues in U.S.-China relations. The deadline to submit applications is March 28, 2025. For more information, visit https://uscet.org/internships/ 3. APIAVote Is Hiring Summer Interns APIAVote is looking for undergraduate students or recent graduates who can demonstrate that they seek to gain hands-on experience in grassroots community development within a national organization. This internship program will also provide hands-on experience and training on how to organize and implement voter activities to increase the participation of AAPIs in the electoral process. The internship will have a $3,500 stipend for 10 weeks from June 9 to August 15 hybrid in-person and online. Apply here: https://bit.ly/4hUee0xin # # # 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 .-person and online. Back View PDF March 24, 2025 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #279 Briefing to Oppose China Initiative Bill; AASF Forum with NIH; Xiaoxing Xi Interview+ #279 Briefing to Oppose China Initiative Bill; AASF Forum with NIH; Xiaoxing Xi Interview+ In This Issue #279 · CAPAC, Impacted Professors, and Asian American Leaders Oppose China Initiative Legislation · AASF Forum with the National Institutes of Health · MIT Science Policy Review Interview with Dr. Xiaoxing Xi · News and Activities for the Communities CAPAC, Impacted Professors, and Asian American Leaders Oppose China Initiative Legislation During the APA Justice monthly meeting on September 9 , 2024, Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC, and Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), reported that a congressional briefing and press conference will be held on Capitol Hill.On Tuesday, September 10, 2024, at 4:00p.m. ET, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) Chair Rep. Judy Chu (CA-28) and Second Vice-Chair Rep. Mark Takano (CA-39) will join victims of the discriminatory and now defunct China Initiative and leaders of Asian American advocacy organizations for a press conference ahead of the House floor vote on H.R. 1398 - Protect America’s Innovation and Economic Security from CCP Act of 2024. WHAT: CAPAC, Victims of China Initiative, and Asian American Leaders Host Press Conference Opposing China Initiative WHEN: Tuesday, September 10, 2024, 4:00 pm ET – 4:45 pm ET WHO: · CAPAC Chair Judy Chu · CAPAC Second Vice-Chair Mark Takano · Prof Gang Chen · Prof Anming Hu · Prof Franklin Tao · Gisela Perez Kusakawa – AASF · Other speakers may join WHERE: House Triangle, U.S. Capitol, Washington DC AASF Forum with the National Institutes of Health On September 19, 2024, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) will host an online forum with the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Speakers will include NIH Director Dr. Monica Bertagnolli who will give opening remarks and NIH Principal Deputy Director, Dr. Lawrence Tabak who will give a presentation.This is the first public event after Dr. Bertagnolli issued a statement of support for Asian American, Asian immigrant and Asian research colleagues on August 15. "NIH greatly values our relationship with Asian researchers and recognizes their extraordinary contributions to advancing science," the statement said. "We are working with stakeholder groups, universities and academic professional organizations to take actions that repair our relationships with these valued members of the research community."The online event is open to the public. Register to attend the Zoom meeting: https://bit.ly/3ZgGNzp MIT Science Policy Review Interview with Dr. Xiaoxing Xi On August 27, 2024, MIT Science Policy Review published an extensive interview with Dr. Xiaoxing Xi , Chinese American physicist and the Laura H. Carnell Professor of Physics at Temple University. Born in China, Dr. Xi moved to the United States in 1989 and has since become a naturalized U.S. citizen. In May of 2015, Dr. Xi was arrested at gunpoint by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for alleged espionage. He was placed on administrative leave and barred from accessing his lab. Four months later, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) dropped all charges against him. Since then, Dr. Xi has launched a campaign against racial profiling in science, testifying before Congress and speaking at universities and conferences.The American Physical Society recognized Dr. Xi’s tireless advocacy by awarding him the Andrei Sakharov Prize in 2020. MIT Science Policy Review spoke with Dr. Xi about the ramifications of being wrongfully accused of espionage, historic parallels in Christopher Nolan ’s movie Oppenheimer, the government’s increasing hostility towards Chinese academics, and what patriotism means to him.The interview was organized in three parts: 1. "Advocacy has become part of my research portfolio." Dr. Xi filed a lawsuit in 2017 challenging his 2015 wrongful arrest, claiming unconstitutional evidence and discriminatory targeting of Chinese American scientists. After an initial dismissal, Dr. Xi won an appeal, allowing the case to proceed to the discovery stage. The process is ongoing without a clear timeline. His research has suffered, shrinking from nine projects to one, due to fear of government scrutiny. Xi now devotes significant time to advocacy, addressing racial profiling of Chinese American scientists. He speaks widely to raise awareness, aiming to impact U.S. policies and protect the scientific community from similar injustices. 2. Finding parallels in Oppenheimer. Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer explores the life of physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer , his role in the development of the atomic bomb, and the repercussions of his association with the Communist Party, which nearly destroyed his career. The movie raises broader issues of science policy, such as open scientific exchange versus political compartmentalization. Dr. Xi found similarities between Oppenheimer’s situation and his own experience of false espionage accusations, particularly regarding political shifts that lead to the prosecution of once-celebrated individuals. Both cases involved the authorities disregarding evidence to serve political motives. While Oppenheimer's case occurred during McCarthyism, today, the fear of China has led to a wave of investigations against Chinese American scientists. Dr. Xi argues that false accusations and racial profiling continue, with both their cases and Oppenheimer's serving as examples of systemic injustices. Despite Oppenheimer sparking discussions on nuclear policy, the issue of false espionage accusations has not received comparable attention, possibly due to the global stakes of nuclear issues overshadowing individual injustices. 3. Science in the crossfire of geopolitical tension. The China Initiative, launched by DOJ in 2018, aimed to address national security threats from China, focusing on theft of trade secrets and espionage. By 2019, it began targeting academics, accusing them of espionage for routine practices like writing recommendation letters or participating in Chinese grant reviews. Nearly 38% of cases involved failure to disclose ties to Chinese universities. The program was officially ended in 2022 due to criticism of racial profiling and ineffectiveness. The Initiative negatively impacted academia, discouraging collaboration with Chinese-born scientists. Dr. Xi argues that increasing scientific literacy within agencies like the DOJ or FBI would not resolve the core issue, as the fundamental belief that Chinese scholars are spies drives these prosecutions. The real issue is a flawed theory that considers Chinese academics as "nontraditional collectors" of information for China, leading to unjust charges based on non-disclosure. Geopolitical tensions, fueled by anti-China sentiment in U.S. politics, make life difficult for Chinese-descended scientists. Laws like the CHIPS and Science Act further restrict collaboration with China. Dr. Xi compares the current situation to the mistreatment of Japanese Americans during WWII and emphasizes the need for highlighting these injustices.Read the MIT Science Policy Review interview: https://bit.ly/3XgtFHN Additional Reading Materials 1. Chapter 10 - Asian Americans as “the Perpetual Foreigner” under Scrutiny by Frank H. Wu Asian Americans play a prominent role in the state surveillance story, because Asian Americans play an ambiguous role in both international relations and domestic race relations. Although people of Asian descent have been arriving in the Americas since before the Civil War – Asian soldiers fighting on both sides of the internecine conflict – Asian immigrants and their American-born descendants, whatever their formal status and however assimilated, have been portrayed as “sojourners” only temporarily resident in the United States and likely to return to a homeland to which they have remained stealthily loyal. The persistent theme has been that Asians are inassimilable into American society, whether by biology, culture, or their own collective choices. The assumption that it is contradictory to be both Asian and American has been used, explicitly and implicitly, to justify discrimination against Asian Americans. The Cambridge Handbook of Race and Surveillance , pp. 190 - 222DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108241304.010[Opens in a new window] Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023 2. Chapter 6 - New Red Scare: The China Initiative by Steven Pei, Jeremy Wu, and Alex Liang The FBI has a long history of surveillance of ethnic Chinese scientists in the United States. McCarthyism, the Economic Espionage Act, and more recently the China Initiative were initiatives adversely impacting Chinese and Chinese Americans living in the U.S. The stereotypes of Asian and Chinese scientists as “disloyal” stem from the perpetual foreigner trope. The key here is that most of them were U.S. citizens. They are as much an American as any other American, yet their “loyalty” is perceived as less trustworthy. This stereotype has harmful, life-altering consequences. Communicated Stereotypes at Work by Anastacia Kurylo (Editor, Contributor), Yifeng Hu (Editor, Contributor), Wilfredo Alvarez (Contributor), & 29 moreASIN ‏ : B0CSK2PGY3Lexington Books (May 15, 2024) News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events:2024/09/10 Congressional Briefing and Press Conference on the “China Initiative” & Asian American Civil Right2024/09/10-12 Chronicle Festival: The Road Ahead to 20352024/09/12 AA4D: Nobel Laureates and Scientists for Democracy 2024/09/15 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/09/19 1990 Teachers Workshop: Asian American Identity2024/09/19 AASF Public Forum with the National Institutes of Health2024/09/19-20 AANHPI Unity Summit2024/09/22 Rep. Gene Wu's Town Hall Meeting2024/09/25 C100: State of Chinese American Survey 2024 2024/09/26 White House Initiative AA& NHPI Policy SummitThe Community Calendar has moved. Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. WHIAANHPI Announces Innovator Challenge to Combat Hate and Promote Healthy Communities The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Office of the Secretary (OS), Office of Intergovernmental and External Affairs (IEA), in collaboration with the White House Initiative on Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders (WHIAANHPI), is creating a rapid response national competition for 501(c)3 community based organizations to identify community-driven efforts to raise greater awareness of hate crimes and address the health consequences, including mental health, of communities burdened by bullying, hate and bias. Desired outcomes include the development of community-driven strategies and application of data-driven tools to combat bullying, hate, and bias to promote healthier communities.The Challenge.gov fund has $325,000 available for up to four (4) awards through this competition. Eligible 501(c)3 organizations may submit a maximum five (5) page proposal through Challenge.gov .Submission Period Opens: Friday, September 6, 2024, 9:00 AM ETSubmission Period Closes: Sunday, September 15, 2024, 11:59 PM ETLearn more and submit your proposal: https://bit.ly/3MDFJy2 3. San Francisco Interim Fire Chief Sandra Tong According to multiple media reports, San Francisco Mayor London Breed appointed and swore in Interim Chief Sandra Tong on September 3, 2024, with the Chinatown native becoming the department’s first Chinese American leader as it continues searching for a permanent successor to outgoing Chief Jeanine Nicholson following her retirement last month. The San Francisco Fire Commission said it unanimously supported Tong’s appointment. Tong spent the last five years serving on Nicholson’s command staff, most recently working as the deputy chief of emergency medical services and community paramedicine. She was born and raised in Chinatown and graduated with a bachelor’s degree in Sino-Soviet Relations from UC Berkeley, as well as a doctorate in organizational psychology from the California School of Professional Psychology.Tong has 35 years of experience working in emergency-medical services. Back View PDF September 10, 2024 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

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 - #378 2/26 Webinar; 2/24 Court Hearing; AAJC; Section 702; Alien Land Laws; FY26 R&D Funding #378 2/26 Webinar; 2/24 Court Hearing; AAJC; Section 702; Alien Land Laws; FY26 R&D Funding In This Issue #378 · 02/26 Webinar: Global Competition for Talent & International Students · 02/24 Hearing: Estate of Dr. Jane Wu v. Northwestern · Joanna YangQing Derman: Update from Advancing Justice | AAJC · Section 702 of FISA Expiring · Alien-ating Asians in 21st-Century Land Laws · Advocacy Works: FY26 Federal R&D Funding · News and Activities for the Communities Happy Year of the Horse! Wishing you strength, courage, and joy in every stride this year! (credit: JadeTime) 02/26 Webinar: Global Competition for Talent & International Students WHAT : Global Competition for Talent & International Students WHEN : February 26, 2026, 8:00 pm ET WHERE : Webinar HOSTS : APA Justice, Committee of 100, US-China Education Trust Moderator : Margaret K. Lewis 陸梅吉 , Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law Speakers: · Fanta Aw , Executive Director and CEO of Association of International Educators (NAFSA) · Steven Chu 朱棣文 , Professor of Stanford University and former U.S. Secretary of Energy DESCRIPTION : As geopolitical competition intensifies between the United States and China, the flow of talent and students across borders has become a critical flashpoint. International students – particularly those from China – have enriched American universities, driven innovation, and strengthened people-to-people ties. Yet today, visa restrictions, security concerns, and shifting immigration policies are reshaping the landscape. At the same time, China and other nations are competing aggressively to attract global talent, transforming higher education into an arena of strategic competition. Chinese American students and scholars increasingly find themselves caught in the middle – facing heightened scrutiny, profiling, and questions about their loyalty. This webinar will examine how the U.S.-China relationship is affecting international student mobility, university partnerships, and the global competition for talent. What are the implications of competition for American universities, research ecosystems, and soft power? How are students and scholars navigating new restrictions and uncertainties? How can policies balance openness and U.S. competitiveness? REGISTRATION : https://bit.ly/1-15email 02/24 Hearing: Estate of Dr. Jane Wu v. Northwestern Liz Rao , daughter of Dr. Jane Wu 吴瑛 , spoke at the APA Justice monthly meeting on February 2, 2026. Her remarks are off the record. The Cook County Circuit Court has scheduled an open hearing of the case of Estate of Dr. Jane Wu v Northwestern University on February 24, 2026, starting at 10:00 am CT. Location is Court Room 1906, Richard J Daley Center, 50 W Washington St, Chicago, IL 60602. For those who wish to attend and show support in honor of Dr. Jane Wu, please contact Valentina Dallona (she/her), Political Director, Justice Is Global, at vdallona@justiceisglobal.org . On February 12, 2026, The Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), in partnership with the Federation of Asian Professor Associations (FAPA), announced that more than 1,000 faculty members joined a letter to Northwestern University demanding accountability in the case of Dr. Jane Ying Wu. Read the joint letter: https://buff.ly/GJBbu1r Joanna YangQing Derman: Update from Advancing Justice | AAJC During the APA Justice monthly meeting on February 2, 2026, Joanna YangQing Derman , Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC, reported that AAJC briefed congressional offices on the status of discriminatory land laws, specifically focusing on ongoing litigation in Texas and Florida. AAJC maintains that property restrictions based on nationality or presumed foreign affiliations (targeting individuals from countries like China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia) raise profound civil rights concerns. Joanna emphasized that any federal legislation in this area must be narrowly targeted to avoid discriminatory impacts on the AAPI community. Joanna flagged the upcoming April 2026 expiration of Section 702 of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). She notes that Congress should not reauthorize Section 702 without sweeping reforms to ensure that it cannot be used as a domestic spying tool. As negotiations are currently underway, now is a critical window to advocate for: · Robust privacy protections and strengthened oversight. · Measures to prevent disproportionate impacts on civil liberties, particularly for AAPI individuals with international familial or professional ties. AAJC and the Surveillance Reform Coalition are actively engaging with members of Congress to balance national security with individual rights. Joanna warned that the community should expect "rapid-fire" requests in the coming months, including sign-on letters and call campaigns as legislative action accelerates. Section 702 of FISA Expiring Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is set to expire on April 20, 2026, giving Congress roughly two months to decide whether to renew, reform, or allow the surveillance authority to lapse. Section 702 permits the government to target non-U.S. persons abroad for intelligence purposes, but it can incidentally collect Americans’ communications. The government may also conduct warrantless “backdoor” searches of that data for information about Americans—an authority that has long generated bipartisan privacy concerns. During a classified Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, reported by CNN on February 9, 2026, lawmakers from both parties expressed frustration after FBI and NSA officials declined to clarify whether the Trump administration supports reauthorization. Although successive administrations have defended Section 702 as a vital national security tool, past FBI misuse and court findings of rights violations have intensified scrutiny. Civil liberties advocates continue to press for reforms, including a warrant requirement for searches of Americans’ communications—a proposal that nearly passed in 2024 and is expected to resurface before the deadline. Read the CNN report: https://cnn.it/3OHrzQz . Read The Intercept report: https://bit.ly/3ZBfBuk Alien-ating Asians in 21st-Century Land Laws According to a Just Security report co-authored by Donna Doan Anderson , Assistant Professor University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and Joanna YangQing Derman , Director of Advancing Justice | AAJC, .the U.S. is experiencing a renewed wave of land-based nationalism that frames foreign ownership of farmland — particularly by Chinese individuals or entities — as a national security threat. Federal initiatives have promoted the narrative that foreign farmland ownership endangers American safety and prosperity. Several states, including Florida and Texas, have enacted laws restricting property ownership based on domicile or national origin, with Chinese citizens specifically targeted in some cases. These laws face ongoing legal challenges, though courts have often dismissed cases on standing grounds. Since 2021, dozens of states have introduced similar legislation. The article places these modern laws in historical context, arguing they echo 19th- and early 20th-century “alien land laws” that barred Asians from owning property under racialized citizenship rules. It contends that current policies similarly rely on stereotypes portraying Asians — especially Chinese people — as perpetual “aliens” or foreign “agents.” Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture show that Chinese-linked entities own only a very small fraction of U.S. farmland — about 0.03 percent of total farmland and less than 1 percent of foreign-held farmland — far less than countries such as Canada, the Netherlands, or the United Kingdom. Critics argue that the focus on China is disproportionate and politically motivated. The article further contends that federal efforts to frame farmland ownership as a national security issue, including attempts to insert restrictions into the National Defense Authorization Act, conflate legitimate cybersecurity concerns with civilian land ownership. It suggests that broad land bans do little to address genuine security threats and may conflict with existing federal investment review authorities. The piece also argues that these laws risk reinforcing anti-Asian stereotypes, increasing discrimination, and subjecting Asian Americans — regardless of citizenship or immigration status — to suspicion and additional scrutiny. It concludes that contemporary “alien” land laws revive historical patterns of exclusion and that advocates should prepare to challenge policies that link Asian identity with national threat narratives. Read the Just Security report: https://bit.ly/4kAOxVz Advocacy Works: FY26 Federal R&D Funding In a Science editorial on February 5, 2026, the past year for U.S. science was portrayed as deeply contradictory. On one hand, the Trump administration’s actions led to funding cuts, the dismantling of workforce programs, threats to indirect cost reimbursements, and tighter immigration for international students—moves that damaged institutions and demoralized students and early-career scientists. On the other hand, outcomes were better than feared: Congress restored science funding, courts rejected efforts to alter indirect cost rules, and NIH and NSF successfully disbursed all appropriated 2025 funds before they expired. These opposing realities, the editorial argues, must be understood together to make sense of the current moment. On February 4, 2026, The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), parent organization to the Science Magazine, reported that President Trump has signed into law the remaining federal appropriations bills for fiscal year 2026, securing funding for U.S. research and development after a year of significant uncertainty. Although the administration initially proposed steep reductions, those cuts were ultimately rejected, reflecting strong bipartisan support for science and technology in Congress. As a result, the final funding levels are far more favorable than expected. The National Institutes of Health received a slight increase, the National Institute of Standards and Technology saw a substantial 26.5% boost, and most other major science agencies experienced flat funding or only modest reductions. These outcomes are presented as a clear contrast to the drastic cuts outlined in the President’s original budget request and as evidence of Congress’s continued commitment to the scientific enterprise. The report emphasizes that this outcome did not occur by chance. Advocacy by scientists, universities, professional associations, and organizations such as AAAS played a decisive role in conveying the national consequences of gutting federal R&D. Decades of sustained investment have built the U.S. scientific enterprise, and the letter warns that reversing those gains would have taken generations to undo. Finally, the report cautions that the work is not finished. Close oversight is needed to ensure that the Office of Management and Budget implements the appropriations as enacted and does not circumvent congressional intent. Looking ahead to the FY2027 appropriations cycle, the message urges continued engagement and advocacy, arguing that flat funding is insufficient and that sustained growth in R&D investment is essential to preserving U.S. global competitiveness. News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/02/17 Asian American Career Ceilings Initiative "Personal Marketing and Mentorship" 2026/02/19 AAUC Town Hall: Fighting the Fear 2026/02/23 Sign On Deadline - Amicus Brief Opposing the Birthright Citizenship EO 14160 2026/02/24 Hearing: Estate of Dr. Jane Wu v. Northwestern 2026/02/26 Global Competition for Talent & International Students 2026/03/02 APA Justice Monthly Meeting Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. 2. AAUC Town Hall: Fighting the Fear WHAT: AAUC Town Hall: Fighting the Fear WHEN: February 19, 2026, 1:00 pm ET WHERE: Online Town Hall HOST: Asian American Unity Coalition (AAUC) DESCRIPTION: At this town hall meeting, we'll hear inspiring stories of how Minnesotan's have stood up to ICE's campaign of fear and intimidation. We'll demystify the the playbook that's used to justify their unchecked power and civil-rights violations. Only then can we mobilize our communities to resist the unlawful actions that have spread across the country. We'll hear from community leaders in Minnesota. We also want to hear from you. If you’d like to speak for up to three minutes, please indicate this on the registration form. This town hall is a chance to build momentum together ahead of the midterm elections. Democracy is under assault, but we still have to the power exercise our Constitutional rights and make a difference. REGISTRATION : https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/3UM6pB0yRMO6kWg-IfmpDA#/registration 3. 2026/02/23 Sign On Deadline - Amicus Brief Opposing the Birthright Citizenship EO 14160 Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) — together with the Korematsu Center (UCI Law), the Center for Civil Rights and Critical Justice (Seattle U Law), and O’Melveny & Myers — is filing an amicus brief warning that the Executive Order 14160 could enable retroactive denaturalization, putting millions of U.S. citizens at risk. Citing United States v. Thind and the history of stripping citizenship from Asian Americans, the brief shows how these threats are not theoretical. Citizenship determines the right to work, vote, travel, and fully belong. Asian Americans have long been at the center of this fight. AALDEF invites you to sign on and affirm that attacks on birthright citizenship — rooted in the legacy of exclusion — have no place in our democracy. Contact Marlena Truong , Voting Rights Advocate, AALDEF: mtruong@aaldef.org . Deadline for sign on is February 23, 2026. # # # 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 February 17, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

James Patrick Lewis Previous Item Next Item

Newsletter - #23 APA Justice Meetings; Charles Lieber Lawsuits; New Visa Rules; Early Voting; 2020 Census #23 APA Justice Meetings; Charles Lieber Lawsuits; New Visa Rules; Early Voting; 2020 Census Back View PDF October 19, 2020 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #55 04/28 Webinar Open; Erika Moritsugu; Yellow Whistle; Petition Delivered; Anti-Asian Hate; Lots More #55 04/28 Webinar Open; Erika Moritsugu; Yellow Whistle; Petition Delivered; Anti-Asian Hate; Lots More Back View PDF April 19, 2021 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

Newsletter - #175 4/3 Meeting Takeaways; CCS Letter to President; Franklin Tao Appeals; NY Hate Crimes + #175 4/3 Meeting Takeaways; CCS Letter to President; Franklin Tao Appeals; NY Hate Crimes + In This Issue #175 2023/04/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting - Quick Takeaways from Three Invited Speakers Committee of Concerned Scientists Letter to President Biden on Cross Border Profiling Professor Franklin Tao To File Appeal to Reverse Lone Conviction 22-Year Sentence for Man Guilty in Hate-Crime Killing of Asian Immigrant News and Activities for the Communities 2023/04/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting - Quick Takeaways from Three Invited Speakers 2023/04/17 Roundtable on a National Media Alert Network and Strike Teams. High level of interest was expressed following Paula Madison's thought- provoking and informative suggestion of a proactive national media alert network. As follow-up action, a virtual roundtable of about 90 minutes will be convened on Monday, April 17, 2023. An agenda for the event is being prepared at this time. Additional details will be coming soon. Please mark your calendar. 2. Let the President's Advisory Commission Know Your Issues and Concerns. Commissioner Dr. Robert Underwood joined the meeting from Guam whose Chamorro Time Zone is 14 hours ahead of the U.S. Eastern Time Zone. On March 10, 2023, APA Justice submitted its comments to the Commission, expressing concerns about government-instigated racial profiling that has been repeatedly explained away and justified under the cover of national security that sacrifices the civil and human rights of the Asian American and immigrant communities. Dr. Underwood encourages the communities and individuals to send their issues and concerns to him at anacletus2010@gmail.com and to the Commission at AANHPICommission@hhs.gov . 3. Educate, Educate, and Educate; Reinstate NYPD Officer Angwang. Despite his busy schedule that included a special session of the New York State Senate, Senator John Liu joined the meeting and spoke passionately about the need for education to counter anti-Asian hate. Senator Liu is in touch with New York Mayor Eric Adams' office regarding the reinstatement of Officer Angwang to the New York Police Department and an apology to Officer Angwang. Committee of Concerned Scientists Letter to President Biden on Cross Border Profiling On March 20, 2023, the Committee of Concerned Scientist (CCS) wrote a letter to President Joe Biden, expressing concerns about Chinese American researchers being profiled, harassed, and interrogated without just cause at the border. The letter was signed by Joel L. Lebowitz, Paul H. Plotz, Walter Reich, Eugene M. Chudnovsky, Alexander Greer, Co-Chairs of CCS. Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, and Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken were copied. CCS referenced a report by the Chronicle of Higher Education on March 1, 2023, which describes instances where professors and scientists have been subjected to harassment and interrogations at the US border. The letter said in part "In this [Chronicle of Higher Education] article, advocates for Asian American academics describe several instances of harassment and interrogations, which have been rising over the past few months. The situation is worrisome since Chinese American researchers should feel free from the China Initiative policy of a few years ago. This policy disproportionately focused on Chinese American researchers in the U.S. Department of Justice’s sometimes overzealous efforts to uncover academic and economic espionage, and in our opinion often constituted ethnic profiling. The climate for Chinese American researchers needs to be made more welcoming. Indeed Gisela Kusakawa (Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum) commented poignantly “Although the China Initiative has ended — and that was a very important and critical step — for many Chinese Americans, it is clear that they still live in a climate that’s less welcoming.” While the Asian American Scholar Forum is aiming to collect more exact data on the number of these border stops, we are aware of a few specific cases: (1) Zhigang Suo, a professor of mechanics and materials at Harvard University; (2) Hong Qi, a visiting scholar of mathematical sciences at Louisiana State University and lecturer at Queen Mary University, London; and (3) a young daughter of a Chinese American scholar traveling alone who was stopped and interrogated about the nature of her father’s research. We ask for border officials to receive further anti-bias training and be encouraged to not focus selectively on Chinese American researchers in stopping them for secondary screening. Thank you for your attention to this very important matter and we look forward to a response from you shortly." Read the CCS letter: http://bit.ly/3Mwsdxx Professor Franklin Tao To File Appeal to Reverse Lone Conviction Attorney Peter Zeidenberg representing Professor Feng "Franklin"; Tao is in the process of filing a brief in the 10th Circuit Court seeking the reversal of the sole count of conviction against Professor Tao. He was the first academic indicted under the now-defunct "China Initiative."; The brief concludes: "The conviction on Count 9 should be reversed because the KU Institutional Responsibilities form—which Dr. Tao submitted only to KU and which KU never shared with NSF or DOE—and which neither agency considered when making funding or other decisions, was not within the Executive Branch’s jurisdiction. There is no legal basis for a felony false statement conviction in these circumstances. The Court’s affirmance would not only be unjust, but it would also open the floodgates to federal prosecutions of employees accused of making misrepresentations to employers that receive federal funding. It would subordinate the decisions of university department chairs, tenure committees, and Human Resources to the whims of federal prosecutors and jurors. An affirmance would also frustrate the ideals of our system of limited government. The Department of Justice is not the Ministry of Truth, and it should have no role regulating routine employee-employer interactions. The Court should reverse." Read the Franklin Tao story: https://bit.ly/3fZWJvK 22-Year Sentence for Man Guilty in Hate-Crime Killing of Asian Immigrant According to a report by the New York Times on March 31, 2023, a man who admitted to brutally, and fatally, attacking a 61-year-old immigrant in East Harlem two years ago because 5 the victim was Asian was sentenced to 22 years in prison. The sentencing of the man, Jarrod Powell, came several months after he pleaded guilty to manslaughter as a hate crime in the killing of the immigrant, Yao Pan Ma. Mr. Powell had suddenly shoved Mr. Ma from behind while the older man was pushing a grocery cart full of bottles and cans near 125th Street and Third Avenue. Video footage released by the police showed that after Mr. Ma collapsed to the ground, Mr. Powell had stomped on his head and kicked him several times in the face. Mr. Ma spent about eight months in a coma before dying as a result of the injuries he sustained in the attack. In entering his plea, according to prosecutors, Mr. Powell, 51, said he had targeted the older man because he was Asian. “New York is one of the most diverse cities in the world,” Alvin L. Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, said in a statement announcing the sentence. “And no one should have to fear that they may be in danger because of their background.” Mr. Bragg’s office said that it had 39 open cases of anti-Asian hate crime. People of Asian descent have been the victims in several high-profile crimes in the past few years. In November 2021, GuiYing Ma, a 61-year-old Chinese immigrant, was fatally beaten as she swept a Queens sidewalk. In January, the man who admitted attacking her was sentenced to 20 years in prison. In January 2022, Michelle Alyssa Go was pushed to her death by a mentally ill man at the Times Square subway station. The next month, Christina Yuna Lee was fatally stabbed by a man who followed her from the street into her apartment. In March 2022, a 28-year-old man was charged with seven counts of assault and attempted assault in connection with a two- hour spree of attacks on women of Asian decent in Manhattan. Read the New York Times report: https://nyti.ms/3zstXjw News and Activities for the Communities 1. Harvard admits record number of Asian American applicants According to a report by NextShark on March 31, 2023, amid allegations of bias against Asian students in its admissions process, Harvard University welcomed its largest proportion of Asian American first-year students in its history.¶ From a pool of 56,937 applicants, the 6 Ivy League university admitted a total of 1,942 students — its second-lowest admissions rate on record — to its Class of 2027. Of this batch, 722 were accepted through an early action process in December 2022, while 1,220 were notified of the regular decision on March 30, 2023.¶ Asian American students composed 29.9% of the new admissions, marking a 2.1% increase from last year’s 27.8%. This, according to Harvard, is the group’s largest-ever acceptance rate.¶ Starting with the Class of 2027, the costs to attend the university — including tuition, housing, food and other fees — will be free for families with annual incomes of less than $85,000, up from last year’s $75,000 threshold.¶ Read the NextShark report: http://bit.ly/3TYEz34 2. The Silence of Florida’s Presidents According to a report on March 31, 2023, Inside Higher Ed asked 40 public college presidents in Florida to weigh in on state higher education reforms. None were willing to speak, even when offered anonymity.¶ As Florida’s Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, seeks to enact sweeping reforms to dramatically reshape higher education in the Sunshine State, students and faculty alike have protested legislation that would ban teaching certain topics, limit institutional authority and undermine tenure protections.¶ But one group has remained conspicuously silent: Florida’s college presidents.¶ Of the 40 presidents at Florida’s public colleges and universities, none have publicly challenged DeSantis as he has gone after diversity, equity and inclusion efforts; sought data on health care for transgender students; and pushed HB 999—legislation to remake Florida higher education.¶ Given their shared silence, Inside Higher Ed asked all 40 presidents that lead the institutions that comprise the State University System of Florida and Florida College System for comment. None of the presidents agreed to discuss attacks on higher education from the DeSantis administration, even when offered anonymity, and multiple institutions did not respond to a request for comment.¶ Florida’s college presidents remain silent as constituents demand they speak up with HB 999 advancing through the state Legislature. Observers suggest presidents are in a no-win scenario, where silence equals compliance but speaking out carries personal and institutional risks.¶ Read the Inside Higher Ed report: http://bit.ly/40yLh2a 3. In the war against history, Los Angeles and Asian American history offer hope According to an opinion by Erika Lee, Regents Professor of History at the University of Minnesota and the president of the Organization of American Historians, published by The Hill on April 1, 2023, since January 2021, 44 states have introduced bills or taken other steps to restrict discussions of race, gender, and sexuality in U.S. history. In 2022, proposed educational gag orders attempting to restrict teaching about race, gender, American history, and LGBTQ+ identities in K-12 and higher education increased by 250 percent compared to the previous year. Further, according to a new report by Pen America, more than 2,500 different book bans were enacted in schools across 32 states during the 2021-2022 school year. A few months ago Florida rejected the College Board’s Advanced Placement course on African American Studies in the state’s high schools, claiming that it “lack[ed] educational value.”¶ There is a war being waged against American history by those hostile to an honest portrayal of our country’s history—and who seek to stamp out the expansive, inclusive, and complicated understanding of America’s past that recent scholarship has revealed.¶ As more than 1,000 U.S. historians gather in Los Angeles on March 30 to April 2, 2023, for the annual Organization of American Historians meeting, the question of how educators, scholars, officials, and activists can work together in this war will be front and center. We will be discussing how current community, civic, and historian-led efforts are confronting our past in ways that should all give us hope for the future. And how Los Angeles may serve as a model for other cities and states to follow in developing approaches that openly and inclusively tackle our country’s difficult racial history.¶ The stakes could not be greater.¶ Read The Hill opinion: http://bit.ly/3MxIAKf 4. Interim Executive Director for MOCA On March 30, 2023, the Museum of Chinese Americans (MOCA) announced the selection of arts and cultural leader Nina Curley as its Interim Executive Director to succeed outgoing President, Nancy Yao, who has been named the founding director of the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum, effective June 5. Read the MOCA announcement: https://bit.ly/3ZEJ8AE Subscribe to The APA Justice Newsletter Complete this simple form at https://bit.ly/2FJunJM to subscribe. Please share it with those who wish to be informed and join the fight. View past newsletters here: https://bit.ly/APAJ_Newsletters . Back View PDF April 4, 2023 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter