In recent years, an increasing number of states have enacted laws to restrict foreign land purchases, particularly targeting transactions involving Chinese individuals, Chinese-owned businesses, and the Chinese regime. These laws, known as “alien land laws” or “foreign land laws,” primarily focus on land near military facilities, with the aim of preventing foreign influences from posing threats to the U.S. economy and security.
In a Dec. 11 New York Times op-ed, Mae Ngai, a professor of history and Asian American studies at Columbia University, voiced concern about the rising crop of alien land laws. Ms. Ngai asked “How did we get here?” citing the “bull’s eye” that U.S. China policies “plants on our backs.”
Like Ms. Ngai, some Chinese Americans are concerned that the laws may resemble the “Chinese Exclusion Acts,” laws that carried anti-immigration sentiments.
The Chinese Exclusion Acts, beginning in 1882, restricted the immigration of Chinese laborers to the United States. The series of laws were a manifestation of anti-Chinese sentiment and discrimination prevalent in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the United States, and they were not repealed until the Magnuson Act of 1943.
So far, at least 15 states, including Florida and Texas, have had legislation restricting foreign land ownership signed into law, and about 20 other states have similar legislation pending.
Leo Yu, a professor at the Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law, opposes the laws, seeing them as discriminatory and unjust. In his research, he points out that over a century ago, 15 western states passed “alien land laws” to prohibit Asians from purchasing land, but the laws gradually faded away in the late 1960s as states abandoned them. He believes that the enactment and repeal of these laws were closely tied to whether the interests of Asian immigrants aligned with the interests of mainstream American society.
Mr. Yu uses the example of how Japanese Americans leveraged the prevailing anti-communist sentiment and the evolving U.S.–Japan relationship to advocate for the repeal of alien land laws in the 1960s. They argued that the alien land laws were damaging to U.S.-Japan relations and inconsistent with American values of equality and fairness. This advocacy played a role in the eventual repeal of these laws.
He also points out that in the context of the new U.S.–China Cold War, a new wave of alien land laws is reappearing in the United States. However, some Chinese Americans today have positions that may not align with mainstream American interests, he said, making it challenging to gain mainstream support as the Japanese American community did in the 1960s.
Integration Into Society Is Key
Chen Chuangchuang, executive director of the Chinese Democracy Party Committee, agrees with Mr. Yu’s analysis, noting that “if Chinese people in America (regardless of immigration status) identify more with the Chinese Communist Party than with America, they may indeed face restrictions, and it is indeed more difficult to avoid restrictions on Chinese people at all levels of the U.S. government, in order to combat the Chinese Communist Party.”Ling Fei, a Chinese-language blogger, and a member of the executive committee of the newly founded political club Asian Wave Alliance, said at the meeting that while the United States is primarily a nation of immigrants, the rights of citizens have evolved over different periods in the nation’s history.
According to Mr. Ling, over a century ago, only white males could vote, whereas now, legal residents in the United States have more avenues for expression and protection of rights, including the option to become citizens. Thus, he believes that the current environment is vastly different from that of over a century ago, and “alien land laws” do not pose a threat to those Chinese individuals who genuinely wish to live in the United States, because they can still participate in society and vote.
Mr. Ling describes some green card holders who do not seek citizenship as those who want to have the best of both worlds, “mining a gold mine in the United States just like before, without considering themselves as the owners of this land.” He suggests that many Chinese Americans are concerned that U.S. policies towards China may eventually target Chinese people, even those with permanent resident green cards. Mr. Ling advises Chinese Americans to think about how to better integrate into mainstream society rather than portraying themselves as victims.
He uses the example of former President Donald Trump’s family, noting that during World War I, when the United States declared war on Germany, the German-American community was the second-largest ethnic group in the United States. However, many German-Americans abandoned the German language and even changed their German last names, such as the Trump family anglicizing their surname from “Drumpf” to “Trump.”
Mr. Ling said he believes that if Chinese want to live in the United States long term, they should actively integrate into society, rather than complain about discrimination. In his view, Chinese in America have a clear choice: they can either be linked to their home country and the CCP, or they can see themselves as part of America.
This year marks the 80th anniversary of the repeal of the “1882 Chinese Exclusion Act” and the 150th anniversary of the Chinese Exclusion Act. Reflecting on the occasion, Mr. Ling presents a different perspective than many, emphasizing that constantly portraying oneself as a victim does not positively contribute to Chinese people’s integration into society. He believes that Chinese people in the United States can effectively safeguard their interests only when their values align with those of mainstream America. Emphasizing Chinese interests unilaterally can lead to conflict and division within American society, he said.
Protecting Security Interests in a Rational Manner
Regarding the resurgence of “alien land laws,” Wai Wah Chin, the founding president of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance Greater New York and an adjunct fellow of the Manhattan Institute, raised a series of questions, emphasizing that national security is a matter that needs consideration.“Why doesn’t China allow aliens to purchase property near military bases and assets? Is national security an issue? Are laws made so all aliens of different countries posing a national security risk are also treated similarly?”
“Any country must be able to create laws to protect its national security interests in a rational manner,” Ms. Chin said. It is also important for everyone to differentiate between aliens and people who descend from that alien country, she added.
Dick Chung, a member of the New York Conservative Party’s Executive Committee, believes that the laws are not targeting Chinese individuals but rather foreigners and institutions that may have a negative impact on the United States.
“In addition, in a technology-driven era, it is necessary to consider the strategic value of land. For example, there are military bases in the Midwest and other parts of the United States, and the purchase of surrounding land by foreign nationals could have an impact on national defense,” he said. “Some Chinese foreign-funded organizations have also purchased farmland in New York State, which could cause serious problems in the food chain if they change the use of the land after purchase.”
Mr. Chung cautions against attributing everything to “anti-Asian hate.” In the context of potential conflict between the United States and China, he reminded Chinese in America to consider their stance thoughtfully.
“If they choose to live in the United States, they should integrate into American society, defending the place where they live,” he said.
