#404 8/3 Monthly Meeting; Science in US Needs Plan; Coalition Pushes Back; AASF Symposium;+ July 27, 2026 Read #403 OMB Rules Gut Grants/Collaboration; Yanping Chen Motions; Election Speech Backlash; + July 23, 2026 Read #402 NSF to Ban Most Research with China; National APA Museum; More ICE Shootings; + July 16, 2026 Read #401 SCOTUS/APAs Reaffirm Birthright Citizenship; Reporter Herridge Contempt Fine Stands; + July 13, 2026 Read #400 400 Issues Later: Still Building Community, Advocacy, and Voice June 12, 2026 Read #399 A Memorable Webinar Co-Hosted by Committee of 100, U.S.-China Education Trust, and APA Justice June 10, 2026 Read #398 Maryland Speaker and Delegate at 6/1 Meeting; Leaders Comment; NYT Immigrant Squeeze;+ June 5, 2026 Read #397 Maryland Reps at 6/1 Meeting; 6/3 Webinar; ICE Sprayed Andy Kim; CBS Radio Shut Down + May 29, 2026 Read #396 Maryland Reps at 6/1 Meeting; 6/3 Joint Webinar; APAICS Update; Innes Lab; McCarthyism May 26, 2026 Read #395 Rep. Dave Min; Researching While Chinese; Attack on MD Delegate Chao Wu; McCarthyism + May 18, 2026 Read #394 Forbidden Citizens; AAJC Updates; USCET Resource Hub; Letter to Congress; Resistance+ May 13, 2026 Read #393 Monthly Meeting Today; APA Heritage Month; NSB Fired by Trump; SCOTUS Case; FISA 702+ May 4, 2026 Read < < 1 1 1 Newsletters APA Justice began publishing a free periodic newsletter about 4-7 times a month in July 2020. You can subscribe here . Visit the Virtual Library to search the entire collection. Filter by year

Newsletter - #404 8/3 Monthly Meeting; Science in US Needs Plan; Coalition Pushes Back; AASF Symposium;+ #404 8/3 Monthly Meeting; Science in US Needs Plan; Coalition Pushes Back; AASF Symposium;+ In This Issue #404 · 2026/08/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting · Science : University Science in the US Needs a Coherent Plan · A Coalition Pushes Back Against OMB Rule · AASF 2026 Frontiers and Pioneers Symposium · News and Activities for the Communities 2026/08/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting The next APA Justice monthly meeting will be held on Monday, May 4, 2026, starting at 1:55 pm ET. In addition to updates from: · Judith Teruya , Executive Director, Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) · Joanna YangQing Derman , Program Director, Advancing Justice | AAJC · Gisela Perez Kusakawa , Executive Director, Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF) We are honored to welcome the following distinguished speakers: · Tam Dao , Associate Vice President of Public Safety and Research Security, Rice University · Kenny Evans , Fellow in Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy, Rice University · Sarah Stalker-Lehoux , Acting Chief of Research Security Strategy and Policy, National Science Foundation · Roger Innes , Distinguished Professor, Biology, Indiana University The virtual monthly meeting is by invitation only. It is closed to the press. If you wish to join, either one time or for future meetings, please contact one of the co-organizers of APA Justice - Vincent Wang 王文奎 and Jeremy Wu 胡善庆 - or send a message to contact@apajustice.org . Science : University Science in the US Needs a Coherent Plan The Science editorial , published July 23, 2026, argues that the Trump administration's ongoing actions are systematically undermining U.S. academic science, and that universities' collective silence in response is making the crisis worse. The Evidence of Harm: · Graduate student enrollment at major research universities (which award half of all U.S. doctorates) has dropped 15% year-over-year, driven by immigration policies deterring international students and funding uncertainty that makes universities hesitant to commit to new doctoral students. · National Science Foundation (NSF) recently cut basic science grants by up to 30% or more, shifting support away from academic research toward entrepreneurial tech initiatives. · Office of Management and Budget (OMB) ignored bipartisan pushback and refused to extend the comment period on its proposal to shift grant-approval power from peer review boards to political appointees — the same rule covered in APA Justice's prior newsletter coverage . · High-profile scientists are leaving: Nobel laureate chemist Omar Yaghi departed UC Berkeley for Tsinghua University in China to lead a new AI-driven materials science institute, and chemist David Nicewicz left UNC Chapel Hill for Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, citing a desire to be in a "country that truly cares about the development and welfare of its citizens." The Core Critique: The editorial's central argument is not just about administration policy — it is about institutional failure. Only a handful of organizations (AAAS and the Association of American Medical Colleges) issued immediate, firm condemnations of the OMB rule. Most universities that objected did so quietly, at the last minute, with minimal follow-through beyond their formal comments — Yale and Duke are cited as rare exceptions. The author attributes this caution to fear of retaliation from the administration. The most concrete, actionable resistance is coming not from universities but from activist organizations like Stand Up for Science. Meanwhile, university leadership is described as more focused on competing with each other for visibility than coordinating a unified response. The Ask: The editorial calls for a "coherent plan" — a clear, practical strategy from academic leadership on how U.S. science can survive and adapt to the current political climate. If university leaders disagree with the more confrontational approach of groups like Stand Up for Science, the piece argues they owe the scientific community a clearly articulated alternative — rather than leaving faculty, students, and prospective students to navigate a "messy patchwork of guidance" without direction. A Coalition Pushes Back Against OMB Rule As the White House's sweeping OMB grantmaking rule moves toward finalization, a coalition of activist organizations, faculty unions, and scientific societies has emerged as the clearest, most organized source of opposition — filling a vacuum left by largely quiet university leadership, as covered in a separate article in this issue. Stand Up for Science: Leading the Fight Founded in 2025 amid the administration's disruption of federal science funding, Stand Up for Science (SUFS) has become one of the most active organizations tracking and opposing the OMB rule specifically. Founder and CEO Colette Delawalla described the group's work as "a frankly enormous campaign educating the public and scientists" on what the rule actually contains. SUFS published a detailed " Impact Report " on the proposal and a plain-language explainer flagging specific legal vulnerabilities — including its finding that the rule's "domestic first framework" restricting foreign collaboration appears to conflict with CHIPS and Science Act carve-outs that expressly permit certain international research exchanges, and that OMB devoted unusually extensive legal justification to its DEI restrictions and expanded grant-termination authority, a sign the agency may be bracing for litigation. This CHIPS Act tension echoes the concerns Stanford physicist Peter Michelson raised regarding NSF's SECURE program, covered in our OMB rule article elsewhere in this issue. SUFS also built public tools making it easier to file substantive, individualized comments rather than form letters, and partnered with the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) on public action events, including a June 18 educational webinar and a July 13 "OMB Deadline Day Rally" billed as "the fight is just beginning." For more information, visit the Stand Up for Science website. The Scientific Societies Mobilize According to an analysis by Tech Policy Press , roughly 70 scientific and professional societies filed formal comments opposing the rule, an outsized share by influence, since organizational comments tend to carry more technical and legal weight than individual submissions. Among the most prominent: · AAAS , publisher of Science , submitted a comment identifying three core harms: OMB overreach, political control over grantmaking and terminations, and expanded restrictions on international cooperation — arguing the rule would "overemphasize political objectives in scientific priority setting" while "deemphasiz[ing] scientific opportunity, merit-based expert peer review, and the needs of American patients, industries, and workers." · The American Physical Society called the rule an "unequivocal threat" to the peer-review system underlying U.S. scientific leadership. · The American Astronomical Society , representing roughly 9,000 members, warned the rule would "cause significant harm to the scientific community, research institutions, and professional societies," specifically flagging new restrictions on covering conference attendance and publishing costs. · The American Association for Cancer Research mobilized its 66,000 members, warning the rule would "undermine scientific independence, restrict collaborations, disrupt the dissemination of research, and seriously threaten progress against cancer." · The American Society for Microbiology flagged that the rule's prohibition on using federal funds for publication costs would force researchers to divert limited funding away from training and mentoring early-career scientists. · The American Geophysical Union , whose board member Tanya Furman warned that restricting scientists' ability to share results "damages our nation and leaves us unable to compete," joined the American Mathematical Society in filing detailed technical objections. · The Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics (COPAFS) , representing the federal statistics and data research community, filed a comment calling for the rule to be "withdrawn in their entirety," warning that "by introducing political oversight, sudden funding instability, and broad self-censorship requirements into the grant-making process, this rule directly threatens the integrity, continuity, and accessibility of vital research" — arguing that accurate, objective, and timely federal data is "the bedrock of public policy, economic forecasting, and scientific progress." · The American Council on Education (ACE) led a coalition of over 60 higher education associations in a joint formal response calling on OMB to withdraw the proposal entirely. · Even the New England Journal of Medicine weighed in: Editor-in-Chief Eric Rubin , a Harvard professor, said the rule "would certainly be bad for Boston," reflecting concern from a region where research institutions employ thousands of federally funded workers. · FASEB , a federation of scientific societies, has announced a "Phase 2" of advocacy focused on direct congressional engagement now that the comment period has closed. An analysis by STAT of the submitted comments found that science advocacy groups and scientific journals led the initial wave of opposition, with higher education coalitions, professional societies, and individual researchers following — and even some industry groups, typically cautious about criticizing the administration, submitting comments as well. Bipartisan Congressional Pushback This advocacy coalition found some traction on Capitol Hill. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, criticized the rule's mid-award termination provisions and new payment-justification requirements, warning they would disproportionately burden small and rural communities alongside scientific and biomedical research. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) submitted a letter of opposition with 125 co-signers. House Democrats Frank Pallone , Diana DeGette , and Yvette Clarke separately called the rule an "obvious power grab" that "threatens to inflict severe harm on the nation's biomedical research enterprise by usurping the critical role of scientific experts in the approval and funding of grants." What's Next With the comment period closed and OMB expected to review nearly 497,000 submissions before finalizing the rule by its October 1 target date, this coalition's next moves — particularly FASEB's promised congressional engagement push and any legal challenges organizations may be preparing — will likely determine whether the record public opposition translates into meaningful changes to the rule. AASF 2026 Frontiers and Pioneers Symposium WHAT: 2026 Frontiers and Pioneers Symposium WHEN : August 7-9, 2026 WHERE : Stanford University HOSTS : Asian American Scholar Forum, Asian American Research Center at Stanford DESCRIPTION : A 3-day gathering hosted by the Asian American Scholar Forum (AASF), in partnership with Stanford University's Asian American Research Center, bringing together scholars, researchers, students, and thought leaders to explore the contributions of Asian Americans in STEM and academia — and the challenges they face. The event includes panels, sessions, and a formal medal ceremony honoring Asian American pioneers in fields like energy, AI, life sciences, and leadership. REGISTRATION: https://www.aafuturefoundation.org/ News and Activities for the Communities 1. APA Justice Community Calendar Upcoming Events: 2026/08/03 APA Justice Monthly Meeting 2026/08/05 C100: The Impact of AI on Asian American Careers in Technology 2026/08/07-09 AASF: Asian American Pioneer Medal Symposium and Ceremony 2026/08/26 C100: An Advice and Networking Event (Technology)Visit https://bit.ly/3XD61qV for event details. # # # APA Justice Task Force is a non-partisan platform to build a sustainable ecosystem that addresses racial profiling concerns and to facilitate, inform, and advocate on selected issues related to justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American community. For more information, please refer to the APA Justice website at www.apajusticetaskforce.org . We value your feedback. Please send your comments to contact@apajustice.org . Back View PDF July 27, 2026 Previous Newsletter Next Newsletter

April 2026 Meeting Summary Apr 6, 2026 Read March 2026 Meeting Summary Mar 2, 2026 Read February 2026 Meeting Summary Feb 2, 2026 Read January 2026 Meeting Summary Jan 5, 2026 Read December 2025 Meeting Summaires Dec 1, 2025 Read November 2025 Meeting Summary Nov 3, 2025 Read October 2025 Meeting Summary Oct 6, 2025 Read September 2025 Meeting Summary Sep 8, 2025 Read August 2025 Monthly Meeting Summary Aug 4, 2025 Read July 2025 Meeting Summary Jul 7, 2025 Read June 2025 Meeting Summary Jun 2, 2025 Read May 2025 Meeting Summary May 5, 2025 Read Monthly Meeting Summaries APA Justice conducts monthly meetings and publishes the meeting summary on this website. Participation is by invitation only. Due to limited capacity, invited participants are typically active and recognized organizations and concerned individuals. Please send an email to contact@apajustice.org if you have interest. < < 1 1 1

Issues Alien Land Bills This item is connected to a text field in your content manager. Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. Read More COVID-19 This item is connected to a text field in your content manager. Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. Read More The China Initiative This item is connected to a text field in your content manager. Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. Read More Warrantless Surveillance This item is connected to a text field in your content manager. Double click the dataset icon to add your own content. Read More

Impacted Persons List Anming Hu 胡安明 Read more Baimadajie Angwang 昂旺 Read more Charles Lieber Read more Chen Song 宋琛 Read more Davis Lu Read more Franklin Tao 陶丰 Read more Gang Chen 陈刚 Read more Gee-Kung Chang 張繼昆 Read more Haizhou Hu Read more James Patrick Lewis Read more Jane Ying Wu 吴瑛 Read more Juan Tang 唐娟 Read more Kaikai Zhao 赵凯凯 Read more Kevin Wang Read more Lei Guan 关磊 Read more Lin Yang Read more Meyya Meyyappan Read more Mingqing Xiao Read more Qing Wang 王擎 Read more Simon Saw-Teong Ang 洪思忠 Read more Song Guo Zheng Read more Turab Lookman 特拉伯·鲁克曼 Read more Van Andel Research Read more Wuyuan Lu 陆五元 Read more Xiao-jiang Li 李晓江 Read more Xiaofeng Wang 王晓峰 Read more Xiaoming Zhang Read more Xiaoxing Xi 郗小星 Read more Xifeng Wu 吴息凤 Read more Xin Wang 王欣 Read more Yanping Chen 陈燕平 Read more Yanqing Ye Read more Yu Zhou, Li Chen Read more Zaosong Zheng Read more Zhendong Cheng Read more Filter by Category China Initiative NIH Other Sort by Alphabetical by first name Alphabetical by last name

Read More 1. A Call to Stop Senate Bill 147 and All Alien Land Laws Friday, February 17, 2023 12:00 AM Read More 1. Bridging Nations: People-to-people Exchange in U.S.-China Relations Thursday, October 16, 2025 12:00 AM Read More 1. From Past Prejudice to Present Policy: The Impact of Land Ownership Exclusion Laws on Diverse Communities Wednesday, December 11, 2024 12:00 AM Read More 1. The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" Wednesday, September 30, 2020 12:00 AM Read More 2. Bridging Nations: Global Competition for Talent & International Students Thursday, February 26, 2026 12:00 AM Read More 2. Fair Housing Rights & Alien Land Laws: Challenges and Advocacy for the Asian American Community Tuesday, March 4, 2025 12:00 AM Read More 2. Historical Re-Hash - Alien Land Law and SB147 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 12:00 AM Read More 2. Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists Wednesday, December 2, 2020 12:00 AM Read More 3. Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination - Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present Wednesday, February 24, 2021 12:00 AM Read More 3. Geopolitics, Identity, and the Fight for Civil Rights Wednesday, June 3, 2026 12:00 AM Read More 4. Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy - How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative” Wednesday, April 28, 2021 12:00 AM Read More 5. The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" Wednesday, June 23, 2021 12:00 AM

Latest Posts Court Hearing and A New Movement Emerges July 24, 2023 We published a Special Edition of our newsletter to cover the July 18 court hearing on Florida's new discriminatory housing law. Read More Lawsuit Against Florida Senate Bill 264 May 22, 2023 A group of Chinese citizens who live, work, study, and raise families in Florida filed a lawsuit to combat Florida’s discriminatory property law, SB 264. Read More Texas House Bill 1075 and Senate Bill 552 January 23, 2023 Texas state representatives are attempting to stop foreign governments from purchasing Texas agricultural land. Read More Rep. Judy Chu's New Year Greetings and 2022 Review January 9, 2023 During the first APA Justice monthly meeting of 2023, Rep. Judy Chu, Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, reviewed the accomplishments of 2022, highlighted by the end of the "China Initiative" and Sherry Chen's historic settlement. Read More Campaign to Oppose The Nomination of Casey Arrowood July 29, 2022 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. Read More APA Justice Calls for Release of Report on Review of "China Initiative" March 8, 2022 On March 8, 2022, APA Justice sent a letter to Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen, calling for the release of a report on the Department of Justice's review of the “China Initiative.” Read More Texas man accused of attacking Asian family over racist coronavirus fears pleads guilty to hate-crime charges February 24, 2022 Nearly two years later, a 21-year-old Texas man who attempted to kill an Asian man and his young child has pleaded guilty to federal hate-crime charges. Read More 12. China Initiative Ends February 23, 2022 Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen announced the end of the China Initiative. The 1,210 days of the Initiative were extremely damaging to individuals and their families, as well as the Asian American and scientific communities. The end of the China Initiative is a welcomed start to correct the harms it caused. APA Justice is committed to continue its work to address racial profiling and seek justice and fairness for the Asian Pacific American communities. Read More 11. MIT Technology Review Investigative Reports December 2, 2021 On December 2, 2021, MIT Technology Review published two investigative reports on the China Initiative as newly appointed Assistant Attorney General Matt Olsen was conducting a review of the initiative. Read More < < 1 2 3 4 5 What's the best flavor? Activists Including APA Justice Resist New "Red Scare" Chinese Americans are increasingly finding themselves targeted by the US in what has become the new "Red Scare."

The House of Representatives has passed H.Res. 908, a resolution condemning all forms of anti-Asian bigotry as related to COVID-19. September 17, 2020 On September 17, 2020, the House of Representatives passed H.Res. 908, a resolution condemning all forms of anti-Asian bigotry as related to COVID-19. The resolution, introduced by CAPAC First Vice Chair Rep. Grace Meng, is a response to the over 2,600 reported anti-Asian hate crimes and incidents in recent months which have been driven by misperceptions about the coronavirus and how it spreads. The resolution reads as follows: (1) calls on all public officials to condemn and denounce any and all anti-Asian sentiment in any form; (2) recognizes that the health and safety of all Americans, no matter their background, must be of utmost priority; (3) condemns all manifestations of expressions of racism, xenophobia, discrimination, anti-Asian sentiment, scapegoating, and ethnic or religious intolerance; (4) calls on Federal law enforcement officials, working with State and local officials-- (A) to expeditiously investigate and document all credible reports of hate crimes and incidents and threats against the Asian-American community in the United States; (B) to collect data to document the rise of incidences of hate crimes due to COVID–19; and (C) to hold the perpetrators of those crimes, incidents, or threats accountable and bring such perpetrators to justice; and (5) recommits United States leadership in building more inclusive, diverse, and tolerant societies-- (A) to prioritize language access and inclusivity in communication practices; and (B) to combat misinformation and discrimination that put Asian Americans at risk. The House of Representatives has passed H.Res. 908, a resolution condemning all forms of anti-Asian bigotry as related to COVID-19. Previous Next House Resolution Condemns All Forms of Anti-Asian Sentiment Related to COVID-19

China Initiative Webinars China Initiative Webinar Series #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative” #1 The Human and Scientific Costs of The "China Initiative" #2 Policy Needs for U.S. Science and Scientists #3 Building Coalition Against “China Initiative” Discrimination: Fighting racial targeting of Asian Americans and communities of color, past & present #4 Legal Resources and Policy Advocacy: How to Combat Racial Profiling Under the “China Initiative" #5 The Mistrial of Professor Anming Hu under the "China Initiative" #6 The Aftermath in the Mistrial and Racial Profiling of University of Tennessee under the “China Initiative”

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

2020 was an unprecedented year that saw our nation increasingly divided and filled with anti-Asian hate. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. December 27, 2020 The year 2020 was one of unprecedented challenges that saw our nation increasingly divided, unable to control the COVID-19 pandemic that was filled with anti-Asian hate and continuing profiling of hundreds if not thousands of Chinese American scientists under investigations and prosecutions. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. On December 27, 2020, a virtual event was held with Professor Steven Pei as the host to conclude a successful GoFundMe campaign , which was reported by the World Journal under the headline 员工勇救亚裔 华人5天募10万 . During the event, Zach Owen and Bawi Cung took the stage to express their appreciation for the generous donations of more than $121,000 from over 2,700 individuals. President Qiang Gan and Treasurer Lin Li of ACP Foundation Dallas reported the state of the finances and various details of the fundraiser. Other organizers for the fundraiser include OCA Greater Houston (H.C. Chang and Cecil Fong); Reagan Hignojos , friend of the Cung Family; United Chinese Americans (Steven Pei); and APAPA Austin Texas Chapter (C.J. Zhao). Bawi Cung and his two boys, aged 2 & 6, were hate crime victims in Midland, TX on March 14, 2020. The suspect thought the Burmese family was Chinese and spreading the coronavirus and attacked them with a knife. As a bystander, Zach Owen disarmed the suspect bare handedly. Unfortunately, Zach’s right palm also suffered permanent injury and has retained only 40% of his grip strength. With the hope to find a better job in the west Texas oil field, Zach came to Midland from Oklahoma. The injury disqualifies him from many oil field jobs. He has also been treated for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The first $50,000 of donation will still be given to Zach on or before his birthday in mid-January 2021 to pay for his ongoing out-of-pocket medical bills, cover some of the financial deficit incurred due to the reduced working hours during his recovery period, and also help with Zach’s return to a normal life. We need more heroes like Zach Owen. Earlier on June 22, 2020, a coalition of Asian American organizations honored Zach Owen and Bernie Ramirez , a Border Patrol agent who also intervened in the violent anti-Asian stabbing with a special Lily and Vincent Chin Advocacy Award Ceremony . It was followed by the From Vincent Chin to George Floyd Webinar led by Helen Zia, award-winning journalist and community activist, and moderated by Gordon Quan, attorney and former Houston City Council member. On August 10, 2020, Zach Owen testified in the Tri-caucus Congressional Forum on Rise in Anti-Asian Bigotry during the COVID-19 Pandemic ,” which was organized by the Congressional Asian Pacific Americcan Caucus. 2020 was an unprecedented year that saw our nation increasingly divided and filled with anti-Asian hate. However, it ended with a positive story on humanity in which the heroes and victims in an anti-Chinese hate crime are not even of Chinese origin. Previous Next 2020 Ends With A Positive Story

Zhendong Cheng Previous Item Next Item