Tag: birthright citizenship

Posted on

Thank You for Joining AABANY at Our 2026 Fall Conference: “Rising Up to Meet the Future: Cultivating Tomorrow’s Leaders Today”

On Saturday, September 26, at Fordham Law School, AABANY hosted its 2026 Fall Conference, with the theme “Rising Up to Meet the Future: Cultivating Tomorrow’s Leaders Today.” Thanks to Fordham Law School for hosting this day-long event. The full-day event offered multi-track CLE programming throughout the morning and afternoon, a plenary lunch session, and different opportunities for professional development, networking, and community-building. In addition to CLE sessions, the Conference also featured the Trial Advocacy Program, Diversity Career Fair, Link-Up Reception, and meetings and gatherings throughout the day hosted by various AABANY Committees. 

The day began with an ample breakfast buffet that was most welcome on a wet and stormy morning. Despite the nor’easter brewing outside, the warmth of the food and energy in the room created a welcoming start to the day, bringing together friends and colleagues, old and new, into the AABANY community. 

Morning Sessions 

From 9:00 to 10:30 AM, participants could choose from the following four CLE panels: 

Rising Up to Serve: Leveraging Bar Associations for Community-Centered Lawyering – exploring how attorneys can use bar associations and community organizations to respond to the legal needs of AANHPI and immigrant communities, expand access to legal services, all the while engaging in community-centered advocacy. 

AI, Voice, Likeness and Persona: How Tomorrow’s Lawyers Will Define Ownership, Consent, and Control – examining the rapidly changing legal questions surrounding AI-generated replicas of voices, faces, likeness, and other personal attributes, covering issues of ownership, consent, control, monetization, and misuse. 

Bridging the Gap! Transitioning from MPRE to Real-World Ethics – focusing on moving beyond the principles tested on the MPRE to consider how ethical obligations arise in the everyday practice of law and how new attorneys can apply those principles in professional and practical settings. 

Conducting Effective Internal Investigations – examining the implications involved in managing internal investigations, from establishing protocols and determining scope to working with stakeholders and protecting privilege. 

The next block, from 10:45 to 12:15 PM, offered: 

How to Lateral: Building a Transferable, and Marketable Skill Set – providing insight into the skills, qualifications, and experiences employers look for in candidates, and how to build transferable skills.

Beyond Forms & Filings: How Tomorrow’s Immigration Attorneys Build Power Through Tech, Data, and Storytelling – examining how immigration attorneys can combine technology, data, and storytelling to strengthen advocacy, address systemic disparities, and better serve AANHPI communities in a rapidly changing policy environment. 

The Modern Advocate: Mastering Courtroom Skills in a Changing Legal Landscape – preparing current and aspiring litigators for courtrooms shaped by AI, covering professionalism, oral advocacy, and working with pro se litigants from diverse communities while also discussing the ethical implications of using AI tools in preparing for court. 

At the Table: Turning Today’s Great Lawyers into Tomorrow’s Trusted Client Advisors – exploring the judgement, steadiness, and strategic communication skills that enable attorneys to grow from technically excellent lawyers into trusted client advisors. 

Plenary Lunch Session: Moving Forward After Trump v. Barbara – Constitutional Principles, Immigration Policy, and the American Process 

At 12:30 PM, AABANY President Varuna Bhattacharyya gave opening remarks to a filled room for the Plenary Lunch Session: Moving Forward After Trump v. Barbara – Constitutional Principles, Immigration Policy, and the American Process. The lunch session brought together professors, lawyers, and advocates to examine the recent Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. Barbara and its implications for birthright citizenship, executive authority, and the Fourteenth Amendment. What stood out, however, was not simply the legal analysis of the decision but also the way the panel connected these constitutional questions surrounding birthright citizenship and the Fourteenth Amendment to the people and stories behind them. 

The panel featured Beth Lew-Williams, Professor of History and Director of the Program in Asian American Studies at Princeton University; Edgar Chen, Special Policy Advisor at the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA); Razeen Zaman, Immigrants’ Rights Director at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF); and Gabriel “Jack” Chin, Professor at UC Davis School of Law. The discussion was moderated by Chris M. Kwok, Adjunct Professor at CUNY Hunter College, mediator and arbitrator at JAMS, and Co-Chair of AABANY’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee. 

The plenary session deepened the appreciation and understanding for how intertwined constitutional law is to individuals’ everyday lives. Hearing Wong Kim Ark’s story alongside Trump v. Barbara made the Fourteenth Amendment feel less like an abstract piece of legal text and more like something tangible that shapes who is recognized as belonging to this country. That’s what made the lunch session so compelling: exploring how someone’s ordinary choices can become a part of a landmark legal history and examining how, over a century later, the country is still grappling with the questions surrounding the idea of belonging. 

AABANY’s Career Advancement Committee Presents: Diversity Career Fair

AABANY’s Career Advancement Committee hosted its annual Diversity Career Fair (DCF) at the 2026 Fall Conference, bringing together various public and private sector employers and interested applicants from 10:30 AM to 4:30 PM. Employers hosted informational tables, met with candidates, collected resumes, and conducted first-round on-site interviews. Throughout the day. The room was constantly filled with individuals looking to learn more about available opportunities and meet active members of AABANY in their professional settings. 

While some employers were unable to attend due to the weather, the DCF still offered a wide range of career opportunities. Law students and lawyers moved between tables, asked questions, exchanged resumes, and connected directly with employers. At public interest tables, attendees gathered to learn about internships, externships, and volunteer opportunities, including opportunities with The Legal Aid Society. Government and public-sector employers, including the New York City Law Department and District Attorney’s Offices, similarly offered attendees the chance to learn directly from practitioners and representatives about these respective career paths. 

In the private sector, employers such as Barclay Damon LLP provided opportunities for one-on-one conversations with one of the partners, allowing attendees to learn about what the firm was looking for while also establishing meaningful professional relationships. 

Attendees also had the opportunity to meet members of AABANY’s Career Advancement Committee, receive career advice, and learn about additional career opportunities. The Committee collected resumes and distributed them to all employers after the event.

AABANY’s Litigation Committee Presents: The Trial Advocacy Program (TAP) 

From 9:00 AM to 4:15 PM, AABANY’s Litigation Committee presented the 2026 Trial Advocacy Program (TAP) at the Fall Conference, giving junior lawyers an opportunity to strengthen their trial skills under the guidance of experienced judges and trial attorneys. The program focused on essentials of trial skills: opening statements, direct and cross-examinations, and closing statements. 

Although TAP is usually held in person, this year’s program was moved to virtual format at the last minute due to the weather. Even with such short notice, the program drew a strong group of participants and maintained the interactive nature of the program. Participants worked through a mock trial scenario and prepared portions of their openings, examinations, and summations with a partner. Through the combination of lectures, practical exercises, and small-group mock trial sessions, participants were able to recreate the experience of an in-person trial as closely as possible. Judges and trial attorneys provided feedback throughout the exercise, allowing participants to strengthen their courtroom skills, receive constructive criticism, and learn strategies they can carry into actual practice. Even in the virtual format, the program fostered productive small break-out group conversations and hands-on participation, showing us how meaningful trial advocacy training could take place both beyond the courtroom and in-person. 

The quality of the faculty was truly impressive. Participants learned from bench and bar alike, including the Hon. James R. Cho of the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of New York; Hon. Frances Wang of Queens Supreme Court; and the Hon. Christopher Chin of the New York Supreme Court. Prosecutorial experience was well represented by Joe Gim, Chief of Criminal Court at the Kings County District Attorney’s Office; Sara Khan, a Homicide ADA at the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office; and Hana C. Kim, Bureau Chief of the Financial Frauds Bureau at the Queens County District Attorney’s Office. Participants were also able to hear from leaders in the private sector and in-house counsel, including Genny Ngai, Partner at Morrison Cohen; Diana Wang, Counsel at Clark Smith Villazor LLP; Hugh Mo, Principal of The Law Firm of Hugh H. Mo, P.C.; and Jacqueline Choi, In-House Litigation Counsel at Red Apple Group, Inc. Together, they offered participants a well-rounded view of effective trial advocacy from every side of the courtroom, and their generosity in sharing both their time and their depth of experience made the program all the more valuable. AABANY thanks each of them for their commitment to imparting trial advocacy skills to the next generation of lawyers. 

Committee Meetings and Gatherings

Beyond the main programming, the third floor had its own energy. AABANY opened up rooms for Committees that wanted a space to network and gather, and a few Committees took full advantage, reserving rooms at different points throughout the day. AABANY’s CIRC Program, which is part of the Membership Committee, got things started in the morning, inviting participants to stop by to chat about their program updates, share feedback, and grab some delicious Asian snacks along the way. They brought so many treats that they continued their gathering in the Soden Lounge on the second floor, where Asian sweets and savory favorites disappeared within minutes. The Government Service & Public Interest (GSPI) Committee’s mooncake social stood out, giving members a chance to meet the Co-Chairs, hear about upcoming events, and enjoy a delicious mooncake alongside refreshments in celebration of the Mid-Autumn Festival. The Solo & Small Firm Practice (SSFP) Committee followed in the same room with an assortment of Levain cookies, a relaxed change of pace after a full day of programming where folks got to meet newer members and have a chance to catch up with other colleagues and longtime members. The Pro Bono & Community Service Committee, together with AALFNY, set up a table at the Diversity Career Fair to promote the Pro Bono Clinics and recruit volunteers.

Afternoon Sessions: 

From 2:30 PM to 4:00 PM, attendees chose from the following programs: 

Rising to the Challenge: A Balancing Act of Caregiving Leaders of the Sandwich Generation – informing potential and future caregivers about basic estate planning tools, long-term care planning, and special needs planning, along with providing them with resources available to help them balance these responsibilities and prepare for any potential crisis. 

Clause and Effect: AI Contracting and Vendor Management – focusing on equipping lawyers to lead clients through AI governance by covering the privacy and cybersecurity risks of AI tools and examining the best practices for negotiating vendor agreements on data use, training, security, audit rights, and liability. 

The Gentle and the Assertive: What New Motherhood Teaches About Advocacy – two mom litigators sharing how the dual roles of mother and advocate are strengthening their advocacy and leadership skills, offering AAPI attorneys a framework to leading authentically while making full use of  their lived experiences. 

The Mechanics of Public Company Stock Ownership and Voting – introducing proxy plumbing, the infrastructure and process behind shareholder voting, and how Broadridge keeps this process efficient, transparent, and compliant so that shareholders’ voices are heard in corporate governance. 

From 4:15 PM to 5:45 PM, attendees could choose from the following programs: 

Race and Space: How Laws Create and Impact Asian Spaces – exploring how, despite the promise of Reconstruction, many AANHPI New Yorkers still live and work in racially concentrated spaces, discussing how law and policy created them and what that means for the future of Asian communities. 

IP and AI Slop: Why is Pikachu Fighting Darth Vader on My Instagram Feed? – examining the rise of unauthorized generative AI videos, the legal issues and options for IP owners, and what it all means for the future of content. 

Building & Using the Diversity Pipeline in Arbitration & Mediation: Why it Matters and How to Participate – focusing on why diversity among arbitrators and mediators matters to the credibility of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and how lawyers, clients, and institutions can strengthen the pipeline of diverse neutrals, to include AANHPI attorneys interested in becoming neutrals. 

No One Teaches This: How Attorneys Actually Build Clients and Become Rainmakers – exploring how attorneys can build credibility and lasting professional relationships that can grow into client development and leadership opportunities. 

Link-Up Reception 

An exciting way to wind down the day was the Link-Up Reception, which provided an opportunity for law firm attorneys and senior in-house counsel to connect and explore potential external legal services. Now in its second year, the invitation-only event was open to select in-house counsel and Gold-level sponsors and above, creating a more intimate setting for sponsors to engage directly with in-house decision-makers and establish professional connections. 

With an almost one-to-one ratio of in-house counsel to law firm attendees, the reception felt intentionally intimate and direct. Rather than having brief introductions before moving onto the next conversation, attendees seemed to have the time and space to really listen to one another. Conversations about professional experiences and careers grew deeper as they continued to talk over hors d’oeuvres, creating opportunities for connections that felt more genuine and lasting. 

The sense of possibility in the room was palpable. People were exchanging ideas, learning about one another’s work, and finding ways to build relationships that could grow beyond this gathering. It was a great way to bring together the professional connections and collaboration that had been growing throughout the day, and it set an energetic tone for the rest of the evening. 

Cocktail Reception and Trailblazer Award Presentation

After the conclusion of the day’s programs, at 6:00 pm, all attendees were invited to the general Cocktail Reception, which provided a relaxed and celebratory setting to connect and unwind. The room was filled with food of every kind, from pigs in a blanket to crab cakes with a variety of  dipping sauces, plus a vegetable and fruit platter that stretched across the center of the room, as well as  both warm and cold options for any preference. Over appetizers and drinks, attorneys, law students, and other members of the AABANY community reconnected with colleagues and formed new professional relationships, with the buzz of conversation filling the air. The reception brought the conference to a close by creating an exciting space for networking and continued community-building. 

The highlight of the evening was AABANY’s Executive Director Yang Chen presenting the Norman Lau Kee Trailblazer Award to Vincent Chang, former President of AABANY. Named for a legal and community pillar of Chinatown, the award honors a leader and role model in the AANHPI legal community, and Vincent Chang’s career exemplifies the award. Not only has he served as former AABANY President, but he was also the first Asian American to have served as President of NYCLA. He has held important leadership positions with the American Bar Association and the New York State Bar Association, where he currently serves on the Executive Committee. 

In his acceptance remarks, Vince reflected on his involvement in the AANHPI legal community and the relationships and experiences that have shaped his career both in the private and public sphere. Vince expressed his appreciation for the community that has supported him throughout his career and acknowledged the strides made by AABANY and its leaders over the years. It was especially meaningful to see Vince celebrated alongside so many AABANY members, from past, present, and future Presidents to longtime and newer members, making for an inspiring and fitting way to conclude the 2026 Fall Conference. 

Thank You!

We extend our deep thanks to all the volunteers from law schools and colleges for providing support with conference logistics, programming, and registration, and to all the moderators, panelists, Program Chairs, and attendees, whose participation and engagement made the Conference so successful and memorable. 

We are also grateful to our sponsors, whose support made the Fall Conference possible: 

For more photos of the event, please visit the links below: 

Thanks to our volunteer photographers Alvin, Haoyu, and Zhiqian.

Thank you for joining us at the 2026 AABANY Fall Conference! We hope you found the day inspiring, engaging, and meaningful, and that you left with new connections and a stronger sense of community. We are grateful to have shared this special event with you and look forward to strengthening our engagement at future events. 

Posted on

NAPABA Statement in Response to Second Executive Order Restricting Birthright Citizenship

For Immediate Release:Contact:
August 7, 2026[email protected]

WASHINGTON – The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) strongly opposes the Administration’s renewed effort to undermine the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship.  In an executive order issued yesterday, and just over a month after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a previous executive order limiting birthright citizenship, the Administration purports to create additional categories of children born on American soil who would be denied birthright citizenship based solely on the status of their parents.

The law is clear. Under Trump v. Barbara, 609 U.S. ____ (2026), children born in the United States—even to parents unlawfully or temporarily present—are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and are citizens at birth.  The Supreme Court recognized longstanding yet narrow exceptions to this rule, which include those born to foreign diplomats or invading armies. In reaffirming birthright citizenship, the Court upheld United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), which rejected consideration of the status of the parents outside of the narrow exceptions.

Yesterday’s executive order attempts to unilaterally expand the categories of children ineligible for birthright citizenship.  It would, among other things, deny citizenship to children born to parents employed by a foreign government or designated as an “alien enemy,” a term that invokes the spectrum of historical injustices during World War II when the federal government removed and incarcerated approximately 120,000 individuals of Japanese ancestry.

Since last year, NAPABA and a large coalition of its affiliated bar associations from across the country defended birthright citizenship in the lower federal courts and the Supreme Court. In several amicus briefs, we highlighted how the past generations of Asian Americans faced discrimination, exclusion, and loyalty-based suspicion, yet their American-born children—including, as another amicus curiae argued, children of parents designated as “enemy aliens”—were nonetheless recognized as citizens at birth.

NAPABA will remain vigilant and stands ready to ensure that the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of citizenship to all persons born in the United States, regardless of the stature or circumstances of their parents, is kept.

Posted on

AABANY Presents “Born American: United States v. Wong Kim Ark” at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

As Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage (AANHPI) Month wound down, attendees gathered on May 27, 2026 in downtown Manhattan to watch the latest historical trial reenactment produced by the Asian American Bar Association of New York (AABANY) entitled Born American: United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which established birthright citizenship as a Constitutional right in 1898, is AABANY’s 17th trial reenactment. This project brings to life notable cases involving Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, to spotlight significant ways that AANHPI individuals contributed to the legal, social, and political history of the United States. Reenactments are first performed at the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) Convention in November, then again in May during AANHPI Heritage Month in New York. 

AABANY’s latest trial reenactment made its New York debut at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP. Attendees settled in to watch a cast of 37 characters played by some 17 lawyers, including many AABANY members.

The reenactment had two narrators, who are also the writers, producers, and leaders of the AABANY Trial Reenactment team: Hon. Denny Chin, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and Kathy Hirata Chin, a retired Partner of Crowell & Moring LLP and previously a retired Cadwalader Partner.

Other cast members included:

Anna Mercado Clark, Phillips Lytle LLP, Partner and Chief Information Security Officer (past NAPABA President, former AABANY Board Officer)

Vincent T. Chang, Law Clerk for Hon. James d’Auguste, Supreme Court, New York County, Commercial Division (former AABANY President)

Andrew T. Hahn, Hawkins, Delafield & Wood LLP, General Counsel (former AABANY, KALAGNY, and NAPABA President)

Yasuhiro Saito, Saito Law Group PLLC, Managing Partner

Francis H. Chin, Opensity Solutions, Senior Systems Engineer (AABANY Membership Director)

Yang Chen, Asian American Bar Association of New York, Executive Director (former AABANY President)

Pamela K. Chen, United States District Judge, Eastern District of New York

Concepcion A. Montoya, Hinshaw & Culbertson, Partner

Lauren U.Y. Lee, Korean American Family Service Center, Board of Directors; Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, former Special Counsel

Kiyo A. Matsumoto, Senior United States District Judge, Eastern District of New York

Rose Cuison Villazor, Rutgers Law School, Professor of Law and Chancellor’s Social Justice Scholar

Jacob Chen, DGW Kramer LLP, Litigation Partner

Jane Kim, Wigdor LLP, Partner; former clerk for Hon. Denny Chin

Janicelynn Asamoto Park, Proskauer Rose LLP, Partner; former clerk for Hon. Denny Chin

Jessica C. Wong, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, Special Counsel

This reenactment was bookended by the case’s connection to current events. The narrators described President Donald Trump’s January 2025 Executive Order 14160, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” which sought to remove birthright citizenship from US-born children of parents who are undocumented or in the country temporarily. 

This case follows the story and life of Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrant parents in 1870, one of only 518 ethnic Chinese born in the United States that year. Wong took multiple trips back to China, before returning to America in 1894, at which point he was denied entry on the grounds of not being a citizen. 

That denial was appealed all the way to the United States Supreme Court. The question before the Court was whether Wong should follow the citizenship of his parents or of where he was born. The reenactment reconstructed the Supreme Court argument, for which no transcript exists, using the briefs, the resulting court opinions, news reports, and other historical documents. Arguments revolved around whether children born in the U.S. are “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” under its plain meaning as stated in the Fourteenth Amendment. The original intent of Congress with regard to children born to foreign-born parents, as well as the implications of barring Wong Kim Ark’s birthright citizenship upon existing immigrant communities—European immigrants—and children of other nationalities, were also explored in the reenactment.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark affirmed Wong’s citizenship in a 6-2 decision in 1898, setting a legal precedent for more than a century. The majority ruling held that the 14th Amendment’s “ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory” and its “peremptory and explicit language” all made Wong an American citizen.

However, Wong’s immigration troubles did not stop there, for either himself or his children. He lived in a time when anti-Chinese sentiment was rampant. Even within the decision itself, Justice John Marshall Harlan, for the dissent, wrote that “There is a race so different from ours that we do not permit those belonging to it to become citizens of the United States.” This captures the discrimination that society had at the time towards Chinese immigrants in America.

The reenactment further explored Wong’s life, as well as his family’s, after the Supreme Court’s ruling. Wong was later arrested in 1901 upon crossing the US-Mexico border, though the case was eventually dismissed—because of United States v. Wong Kim Ark. His four sons, born in China, faced intense scrutiny when they sought to come to the United States seeking citizenship as sons of a U.S. citizen. They faced heightened suspicion and interrogation that stretched over weeks or months of detention and aimed to determine their familial relationship to Wong, a form of scrutiny common to Chinese immigrants in the early 20th century. 

The end of the reenactment returned to Trump’s executive order. The many lawsuits and preliminary injunctions that responded to Trump’s January order make frequent reference to United States v. Wong Kim Ark as well-settled precedent for birthright citizenship. The reenactment shares the responses to Trump’s Executive Order, including one from Judge Deborah Boardman in Maryland, who said that the executive order “conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment [and] contradicts 125-year old binding Supreme Court precedent.”

In this context, it becomes vitally important to revisit Wong Kim Ark’s life and times. Amid the prevalence of anti-immigrant rhetoric during the 1890s, United States v. Wong Kim Ark set precedent for generations of immigrants, including Asian Americans, and was reaffirmed throughout a series of 20th century Supreme Court cases, including INS v. Errico, 385 U.S. 214 (1966) and Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982).

A discussion panel and Q&A session followed the reenactment, where questions of relevance to current times were at the forefront. Attendees questioned and discussed how America would change if birthright citizenship gets overturned. Mere months ago, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Barbara v. Donald J. Trump, the class action against President Trump’s executive order banning birthright citizenship. It was especially enlightening to hear Judge Chin talk about how putting together this reenactment made him understand his own family’s immigration history better and shined a light on often unspoken parts of the Chinese immigrant experience.

The reenactment highlighted the reaction from Wong Kim Ark’s great-grandson Norman Wong. Norman said in an interview for a documentary, “We thought [birthright citizenship] was a dead issue. These were rights we did not have to fight for anymore. It wasn’t something that anybody would have to worry about. … Now I’m glad [my great-grandfather] stood up.” 

Following the reenactment, guests and participants enjoyed a networking and dinner reception, which included hors d’oeuvres, a dinner buffet, and a delicious handroll bar. Attendees mingled as they ate, reflecting on the reenactment and congratulating the actors for a job well done.

AABANY’s reenactment of United States v. Wong Kim Ark will be made available on AABANY’s trial reenactment website, where the script and materials can be shared upon request. AABANY’s past trial reenactment scripts are also available upon request. In fact, our most popular reenactment, “The Murder of Vincent Chin,” has been performed over 30 times globally. 

We are grateful to all of the participants in the reenactment for dedicating their time to this project. To learn more about the other trial reenactments AABANY has organized, please visit our reenactments website.

Posted on

NAPABA to Host Webinar Previewing Supreme Court Case on Birthright Citizenship

The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) will host a webinar titled “SCOTUS Oral Argument Preview: Who is Allowed to be a U.S. Citizen? Defending Birthright Citizenship and the Role of Asian American History” on Thursday, March 26 at 3:00 p.m. ET.

The program will preview the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments in Trump v. Barbara, a case addressing the scope of birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment. On April 1, 2026, the Court is scheduled to hear arguments concerning Executive Order 14160, which declared that only children born to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents would automatically receive citizenship at birth. The executive order immediately faced legal challenges across the country.

NAPABA joined a broad coalition of bar associations in filing amicus briefs opposing the order. The March 26 webinar will discuss NAPABA’s role in defending birthright citizenship in the lower federal courts and before the Supreme Court, as well as the broader legal and historical context surrounding the issue.

The panel will feature Professor Beth Lew-Williams, Director of the Program in Asian American Studies and Professor of History at Princeton University. Professor Lew-Williams is the author of The Chinese Must Go: Violence, Exclusion, and the Making of the Alien in America (Harvard University Press, 2018), a widely acclaimed work examining the history of anti-Chinese violence and exclusion in the United States.

Also joining the discussion is Wendy M. Feng, Counsel at Seyfarth Shaw LLP and lead outside counsel for the legal team representing NAPABA in the litigation. The program will be moderated by Edgar Chen, NAPABA Special Policy Advisor.

Together, the panelists will examine the legal arguments in Trump v. Barbara, the historical foundations of birthright citizenship, and the role Asian American legal history plays in shaping contemporary constitutional debates.

Registration for the webinar is free and open to the public. Click here to learn more and register for the event.

Posted on

NAPABA Applauds Ninth Circuit Decision Upholding Birthright Citizenship

For Immediate Release:
July 24, 2025		Contact:
Rahat N. Babar, Deputy Executive Director

WASHINGTON — The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) applauds the U.S. Court of the Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision pausing Executive Order 14160 nationwide. In State of Washington v. Trump, the court ruled yesterday that EO 14160, which would deny citizenship to children born of parents who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents, violates the plain language of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It also concluded that a nationwide injunction was warranted to award the states challenging EO 14160 complete relief.

“We are grateful that the court recognized what NAPABA has argued from the beginning—EO 14160 undermines the constitutional promise of an equal claim of citizenship to all persons born in the United States and runs against nearly 127 years of history, precedent, and practice,” said Thy Bui, President of NAPABA.

NAPABA and a coalition of its affiliates filed an amicus brief with the Ninth Circuit (along with the First Circuit and the Fourth Circuit) and explained that EO 14160 distorts the holding of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). Wong Kim Ark upheld the conferral of citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. The brief underscored this precedent’s historical significance and the role of Asian Americans in shaping our nation’s foundational immigration and civil rights precedents.

“If implemented, EO 14160 would exact disproportionate harm on the Asian American community,” said Priya Purandare, Executive Director of NAPABA. “The question of a child’s citizenship in the United States ought not to be dependent on the stature or circumstances of their parents. Nor should it turn on whether a child is born in one state versus another. For the guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment to be vindicated, birthright citizenship must apply to all children across the United States. We are grateful that the court agreed.”

The Ninth Circuit recognized Wong Kim Ark’s precedential weight. Despite the harsh legal environment for Chinese Americans living in the 19th century under the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Geary Act, Wong Kim Ark, a young Chinese American who was born in San Francisco to noncitizen parents, “acquired United States citizenship by birth.”

The U.S. Constitution demands that the same must be true for children born today. Consistent with the Citizenship Clause’s plain language, EO 14160 must ultimately be set aside.

###

The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) represents the interests of over 80,000 Asian Pacific American (APA) legal professionals and over 90 national, state, and local APA bar associations. NAPABA is a leader in addressing civil rights issues confronting Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities. Through its national network, NAPABA provides a strong voice for increased diversity of the federal and state judiciaries, advocates for equal opportunity in the workplace, works to eliminate hate crimes and anti-immigrant sentiment, and promotes the professional development of people of all backgrounds in the legal profession.

Posted on

NAPABA Advocacy Update

NAPABA Advocacy Update

July 2, 2025

Just over a month ago, NAPABA held its annual Lobby Day in Washington, DC. We convened our members in the Nation’s capital to support the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) community, advance a fair and humane immigration system, defend the rule of law and the legal profession, and advance democracy and civil rights. With over 60 congressional meetings and over 20 states represented, NAPABA demonstrated its commitment to change the status quo for our community.

Since then, and since NAPABA’s last update to you, we have been tracking developments that impact our organization, our mission, our legal community, and the broader AANHPI community. Please find some of these updates below

I. NAPABA-Led Coalition Continues to Defend Birthright Citizenship

After our filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in April 2025, NAPABA continued to lead a coalition of nearly 50 of its affiliates and national associates from across the country to defend birthright citizenship. Besides our amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit, which is available here, NAPABA filed substantially similar amicus briefs defending birthright citizenship in matters pending in the First Circuit and the Fourth Circuit. Those briefs can be viewed here and here.

Our brief explains the critical historical context behind United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). The case was decided during an era of intense anti-Chinese sentiment, immigration restrictions, widespread violence, and mass expulsions. In Wong Kim Ark, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that birthright citizenship is automatically conferred to children born on American soil, even to those whose parents were from the most disfavored migrant group in the country at the time. NAPABA’s amicus brief underscores the importance of understanding Asian American legal history as a critical part of American history. Wong Kim Ark and other cases involving Asian American litigants in the late 19th century are foundational precedents for today’s immigration and civil rights law.  

Media outlets such as Law360 and the National Law Journal have covered NAPABA’s legal arguments.

On Friday, June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the scope of the preliminary injunctions that can be available to pause the executive order limiting birthright citizenship. The Court did not address the constitutionality of the executive order. Thus, litigation will continue as does NAPABA’s advocacy. The question of a child’s citizenship in the United States ought not to be dependent on the stature or circumstances of their parents. Nor should it turn on whether a child is born in one state versus another. For the guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment to be vindicated, birthright citizenship must apply to all children across the United States.  

II. NAPABA Condemns Political Violence and Hate

In recent weeks, we have witnessed incidents of hate and political violence that are antithetical to the values of our community and our country. In the early morning hours of June 14, 2025, an armed perpetrator shot two Minnesota state legislators and their respective spouses in the suburbs outside of Minneapolis in an “act of targeted political violence,” according to the Governor of Minnesota. State Representative Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, died. State Senator John A. Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, survived and sustained injuries from the attack.

Weeks earlier, on May 21, 2025, a deadly shooting in Washington, DC, targeted Israeli Embassy diplomats.  And on June 1, 2025, eight people in Boulder, Colorado, were injured when a perpetrator threw incendiary devices into a crowd during a demonstration intended to remember hostages in the Middle East. One of those injured died from her wounds.

On top of these horrific acts, some elected leaders have sought divisiveness rather than inclusion. In a social media post, a member of Congress expressed that it was “deeply troubling” that a Sikh faith leader, Giani Surinder Singh, led a prayer on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. The member, who had misidentified Giani Surinder Singh as Muslim, declared that Singh “should never have been allowed” to lead a prayer in Congress.

In the race for New York City’s mayor, some members of Congress have lodged Islamophobic comments against Zohran Mamdani, the winner of the primary election. One member of Congress posted an offensive cartoon of Mamdani, referred to Mamdani with a slur, and called on the Attorney General to institute denaturalization proceedings and remove him from the United States. Another member of Congress posted a photo on social media of Mamdani wearing a kurta and greeting others for an Eid service with the caption, “After 9/11, we said, ‘Never Forget.’ I think we sadly have forgotten.”  

Further, the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, revised the National Crime Victimization Survey and removed questions about gender identity and about hate crimes against transgender people. Previously, the questions on sexual orientation and gender identity allowed researchers, policymakers, and advocates to quantify the disproportionate victimization of the LGBTQ+ community. Comprehensive data collection surrounding hate crimes and hate incidents is critical in order to better combat such conduct and to take legislative action. NAPABA joined 90+ organizations opposing the decision. Following our advocacy, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reinstated the question pertaining to hate crimes involving gender identity.  

The Justice Department’s action preceded a recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a Tennessee law that banned hormone therapies for transgender minors.

Hate, regardless of the form, political violence, and the marginalization of vulnerable communities must be rejected. NAPABA will continue to oppose hate, support the diverse AANHPI community, and work to strengthen the rule of law and democracy.

III. NAPABA Calls for a Fair and Humane Immigration System

Fundamental to a fair and humane immigration system is one that is subject to constitutional limits, non-discriminatory, and ensures meaningful due process. Recent developments, however, brush against these values.

On May 28, 2025, the federal government announced that it would work to “aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students.”  This policy declaration has not only caused needless anxiety throughout our community, but it is also wholly misguided. While policymakers have the prerogative to address the legitimate national security concerns confronting the United States, they may not enact discriminatory policies like blanket visa revocations based only on national origin and alien land laws. Instead of measures that are tailored to an evidence-based, national security nexus, these recent policies foster an atmosphere of distrust that targets Asian Americans generally, not just the Chinese American community.

NAPABA is also concerned about the federal government’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. On June 2, 2025, NAPABA joined 60 other AANHPI organizations, led by the Japanese American Citizens League (JACL), in filing an amicus brief that urged the court to fulfill its role in preserving the right to due process and ensuring meaningful judicial review of executive orders. The last invocation of the Alien Enemies Act justified the incarceration of over 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II. The amicus brief shared the stories of these Americans and their families. We urged the court to uphold the right of meaningful due process and judicial review of executive actions.

Lastly, starting on June 6, 2025, protests erupted in Los Angeles in response to federal immigration enforcement actions in the city. On June 7, 2025, for the first time in 33 years, the President deployed National Guard and military service members in Los Angeles to protect federal law enforcement and federal property. The protests continued until around June 15.

NAPABA recognizes the widespread anxiety throughout the AANHPI community and the broader immigrant community.  Whether involving the changes in immigration enforcement policy or the announcement of new immigration policies generally, the shifting landscape of immigration law has created much uncertainty. This includes a recent policy change from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement pertaining to the removability of certain Vietnamese immigrants who arrived in the United States prior to 1995. Please visit the Asian Law Caucus’s website for more information.  

In the coming days, NAPABA will promote educational programming to cover many of these changes and more.  Please stay tuned.

We have a lot of work ahead of us, and the NAPABA Policy Team will do its part. But we need your partnership, too. Engage in our committees and networks and register for the NAPABA Convention in Denver, which will be held on November 6-8, 2025. We look forward to seeing you.

Posted on

NAPABA Statement in Response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc.

For Immediate Release:
Date: June 27, 2025		Contact
Rahat N. Babar, Deputy Executive Director

WASHINGTON – Today, in the cases involving challenges to the executive order that limits birthright citizenship, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the scope of the preliminary injunctions that can be available to pause the executive order before a final judgment can be rendered. This discrete, preliminary issue will now return to the district courts for them to craft an injunction that, in the Court’s view, is no “broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue.” The Court did not address the constitutionality of the executive order.  

In the meantime, as the parties litigate over the scope of the injunctions, and as three federal courts of appeals evaluate the substantive challenges to the executive order, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) reaffirms the principles that underlie our amicus briefing to the courts that Executive Order 14160 must be set aside.

First, EO 14160 upends the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of an equal claim of citizenship to all persons born in the United States. Under the plain text of the Fourteenth Amendment and longstanding historical precedent, EO 14160 is patently unconstitutional.

Second, EO 14160 distorts the holding of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). As we explained in our amicus brief, the Court upheld the conferral of citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. The brief underscored the historical significance of this precedent and the role of Asian Americans in shaping our nation’s foundational immigration and civil rights precedents.

Lastly, if EO 14160 is implemented, disproportionate harms would result for Asian American communities. In the United States, 65% of Asian American adults are immigrants. Asian immigrants account for a substantial percentage of the overall immigrant population, with 17% of all undocumented immigrants having Asian ancestry and more than 88% of individuals holding H-1B visas. Under EO 14160, children of these categories of immigrants would be excluded from citizenship, despite being born, raised, and educated in the United States and despite knowing no other country of allegiance.

The question of a child’s citizenship in the United States ought not to be dependent on the stature or circumstances of their parents. Nor should it turn on whether a child is born in one state versus another. For the guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment to be vindicated, birthright citizenship must apply to all children across the United States. 

Posted on

NAPABA Leads Broad Coalition to Defend Birthright Citizenship in Court

Over 40 national, state, and local bar associations join NAPABA to oppose Executive Order 14160.

NAPABA corrects the federal government’s misreading of U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.

NAPABA highlights the detrimental impact on the Asian American community if EO 14160 is upheld.

WASHINGTON – The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) and 43 of its affiliates and national associates from across the country joined forces to defend the fundamental constitutional guarantee of citizenship. Led by NAPABA, the coalition filed an amicus brief, which can be found here, with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in State of Washington v. Donald J. Trump.

The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution promises every person equal treatment under the law. It also includes an equal claim of citizenship to all persons born in the United States, regardless of the stature or circumstances of their parents.

Executive Order 14160 upends that promise. It refuses to recognize the birthright citizenship of any child born in the United States to a mother who is lawfully present on a temporary basis, like those on work or student visas, and a father who is neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident.

In our amicus brief, NAPABA and the coalition highlight the core principles established in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). The Court upheld the conferral of citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause. The brief underscores the historical significance of this precedent, the role of Asian Americans in shaping our nation’s foundational immigration and civil rights precedents, and the disproportionate harms that EO 14160, if upheld, would visit upon Asian American communities.

EO 14160 distorts the holding of Wong Kim Ark. The federal government misreads the Court’s 1898 description of Wong’s parents as having a permanent residence in the U.S. Our brief explains this oversimplification by recounting the historical discrimination Chinese migrants faced in the late 19th century. Under this backdrop, their presence in the country was a far cry from the lawful permanency afforded to today’s green card holders. At that time, the Chinese immigrants were excluded from full participation in civic life and systematically denied the ability to integrate into American society. They faced mass violence and a cascading series of exclusionary laws designed to expel them. By drawing this parallel, NAPABA underscores how EO 14160 would disproportionately harm Asian American communities, echoing the same past exclusionary motives.

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to our exemplary legal team for their tireless work behind the brief, including Rahat N. Babar, who serves as NAPABA’s Deputy Executive Director and General Counsel, Edgar Chen, who serves as NAPABA’s Special Policy Advisor, and Chris M. Kwok, who serves as co-chair of NAPABA’s Dispute Resolution Committee.

Posted on

NAPABA | Taking Action in 2025

Dear NAPABA Community,

Before the start of this new year, I wrote to you and shared not only my gratitude for an incredible 2024, but also our commitment to advance NAPABA’s mission heading into 2025. Though we are merely two months into the new year, we have already witnessed several developments that impact NAPABA’s work and the broader Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) community.

On his first day in office on January 20, 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued executive orders that jeopardized the constitutional guarantee of citizenship for all persons born in the United States, the right to seek asylum, the refugee resettlement system, and the LGBTQ+ community, among others. NAPABA swiftly condemned these actions, which ran counter to our values. Since then, the federal government has enacted a slew of policies, which have already drawn significant concern for the rule of law, in addition to attacks on lawful diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives both within the federal government and the private sector.  

When it comes to our values, our words of disagreement are not enough. NAPABA is charged to promote justice and equity for the AANHPI community. My team is closely monitoring developments from the federal government, and we are working with stakeholders, coalition partners, policymakers, and others to respond appropriately.

NAPABA is prepared to act. I have outlined below, in broad strokes, our intended course of action and how you can get involved. In the coming weeks and months, and with your partnership, we plan to meaningfully support our community and actively counter policies that detrimentally affect the AANHPI community.

I. Direct Support for NAPABA Affiliates and National Associates

NAPABA stands ready to deliver financial support to our affiliates and national associates for their work in the community. As leaders in their respective regions, affiliates and national associates can act as trusted messengers delivering pivotal information and services to their members and broader AANHPI communities. We will prioritize projects that speak to the challenges today: for example, educational seminars on the state of immigration, pro bono initiatives to support heightened immigration needs of the Asian American population, funding language translations for educational materials and resources, and local and state advocacy efforts that align with NAPABA values and positions. To apply for funding, please visit our website.

Building on the work of the NAPABA Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Task Force, we plan to create toolkits for our affiliates and national associates. They will include resources to advance the work of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and immigration resources such as hosting naturalization clinics and the creation of attorney directories that address priority areas like immigration law.

II. NAPABA Engagement with Policymakers

The NAPABA Policy Team leads our engagement with stakeholders and policymakers at the federal and state levels. We advance our policy priorities, whether it be in our opposition to anti-Asian hate and discriminatory alien land law policies to our support for voting rights. Now, as our engagement will necessarily go deeper, we are investing in an expansion of our Policy Team.  

Plus, the planning is well underway for our upcoming Lobby Day, which is scheduled for May 20-21, 2025, in Washington, DC. As the largest AANHPI advocacy effort on Capitol Hill, NAPABA Lobby Day will bring our members from across the Nation to the halls of Congress to demonstrate not only the strength of our community, but also to advance the critical issues facing the AANHPI community. Our members will meet with Congressional offices on both sides of the aisle to highlight the causes important to us and our communities. Your voice is pivotal. For more information on Lobby Day and to register, please visit our website.

III. Narrative Change and Education
In the coming weeks and months, NAPABA will highlight how recent actions from the federal government not only impact our communities, but also the critical role that the AANHPI communities played in the development of the rights that we cherish today. Whether it be on birthright citizenship, the right to asylum and the refugee resettlement program, or the barriers that our community faces in the legal profession, NAPABA will uplift those stories and our history, which are intertwined with the fabric of American life today. Please be on the lookout through our social media channels, our website, and email for additional educational resources and programming. These efforts will be on top of the multitude of informative programs during the Nation’s largest convening of legal professionals: the NAPABA Convention in Denver, Colorado, on November 6-8, 2025.

NAPABA has an exceptionally talented and enthusiastic full-time staff, but we cannot carry out our work without you. The strength of NAPABA is comprised of passionate and energetic volunteers like you. As I mentioned above, here are some ways where you can get involved:

  1. Submit a CLE Program Proposal for the 2025 NAPABA Convention. Submission. deadline is March 14, 2025.
  2. Register and participate in NAPABA Lobby Day on May 20-21, 2025.
  3. Join a NAPABA Committee and Network to engage with professionals in your practice area or who share your affinity.
  4. Register and attend the 2025 NAPABA Convention. Registration opens in June 2025.

Lastly, we want to hear from you with any suggestions. Please don’t hesitate to email us at [email protected] with your thoughts.

Regardless of the challenges, NAPABA remains focused on the work ahead, and I hope that you will join us in the journey.

Very truly yours,


Priya Purandare
Executive Director

Posted on

NAPABA Condemns President Trump’s Executive Orders Targeting Birthright Citizenship, Refugee Resettlement, Asylum Protections, the LGBTQ+ Community, and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

For Immediate Release: January 22, 2025Contact:
Rahat N. Babar, Deputy Executive Director

WASHINGTON – On his first day in office, President Donald J. Trump issued executive orders that jeopardize the constitutional guarantee of citizenship for all persons born in the United States, the right to seek asylum, the refugee resettlement system, the LGBTQ+ community, and several other critical areas impacting our community as outlined below. The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association condemns these actions unequivocally. They run counter to the core values of NAPABA, the interests of the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) community, and the tenets of this Nation.

Birthright Citizenship for U.S.-Born Individuals

Since the end of the Civil War, the Fourteenth Amendment promised future generations that they would be treated equally under the law. It also included an equal claim to citizenship to all persons born in the United States, regardless of stature or the circumstances of their parents. The executive order upends that promise. It refuses to recognize the birthright citizenship of any child born in the United States to a moth er who is lawfully present on a temporary basis, like those on work or student visas, and a father who is neither a U.S. citizen nor a lawful permanent resident.

The Asian American community is no stranger to such unconstitutional attacks. More than 125 years ago, a young Chinese American, Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco, sought to return to the United States after a trip to visit his family in China. The government denied him entry and claimed that he was not an American citizen. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed, holding that a child born in the United States to noncitizen parents is entitled to automatic citizenship. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). Congress confirmed that understanding in federal law. See 8 U.S.C. § 1401.

Wong Kim Ark is settled law. If the executive order is left to stand, countless families within the Asian American community—the majority of whom are immigrants and the children of immigrants—would be impacted, unsettling their lives. The fundamental constitutional guarantee to citizenship cannot be discarded by a stroke of the pen, and NAPABA strongly opposes any effort to weaken the right under the Fourteenth Amendment.

NAPABA commends the ACLU, the Asian Law Caucus, and the coalition of states led by New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin for promptly challenging the executive order in court.

Asylum, Refugee Resettlement, and Trust with Immigrant Communities

NAPABA recognizes the need to address the situation at our southern border. But we must not compromise our values as a Nation that welcomes immigrants and protects refugees. The President’s executive order eliminates any avenue for individuals—including many who hail from Asian countries—to claim asylum at the southern border. The order also suspended the entry of refugees under the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.

These executive actions are inconsistent with our country’s obligation under domestic and international law to provide refuge to those fleeing persecution and war. With nearly three million such refugees from Southeast Asia fleeing conflicts in the 1970s and new generations arriving since, the protections offered by the United States as a leading signatory to the International Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol are critical to uphold.

The Asian American story is one of perseverance, with countless numbers throughout history fleeing persecution for a better life in the United States. We need not turn our back on history or the generations seeking refuge. NAPABA has consistently supported the refugee resettlement program and this Nation’s long history of welcoming those from Asia seeking the protections of our Constitution.

Further, our immigrant communities are better served and safer where there is trust. Coercing state and local law enforcement agencies to carry out federal civil immigration enforcement undermines that trust and damages the relationship with the communities that they serve. For the Asian American community that endured the recent wave of anti-Asian hate, the fear of immigration consequences places an unnecessary obstacle to report and address hate crimes.

In another executive order, the President sought to restrict federal funds to jurisdictions “which seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of Federal [immigration] enforcement operations.” The choice by state and local leaders to decline voluntary cooperation with federal civil immigration enforcement is not only lawful, but one that prioritizes the best interests of their communities. Jurisdictions ought not to be penalized for advancing public safety in their region.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

In a call to action several months ago, NAPABA emphasized how the majority of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives serve to increase access and opportunity, not stifle them. President Trump’s action to eliminate those efforts in the federal government is misguided and impacts AANHPI communities. The executive order purports to advance “equal dignity and respect,” yet its actions yield the opposite.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts minimize bias and barriers while fostering unity. And contrary to the executive order, not only do such initiatives advance the promises of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, they bring greater meritocracy to our workplaces, unlocking individual potential and belonging across the board where everyone has a fair shot at success.

LGBTQ+ Dignity

Every person, regardless of how they identify their gender, deserves respect, dignity, and the equal protection of the law. Another executive order attacks and jeopardizes the transgender and broader LGBTQ+ community, potentially undermining workplace and school protections, and denying access to essential public services and health care.

NAPABA firmly believes in the rights and dignity of the LGBTQ+ community. Just recently, NAPABA opposed H.R. 28, which would exclude those in the transgender, nonbinary, and intersex community from athletic programs in schools. The policies of government ought to be guided by the inclusion of all segments of our communities, not the exclusion of the most vulnerable.

Capital Punishment

In another executive order, the President reversed the last administration’s moratorium on capital punishment and reauthorized the Attorney General to pursue the death penalty. NAPABA stands opposed to the death penalty, which is disproportionately imposed on members of minority groups, individuals suffering from mental illness, and individuals raised in poverty. It does not deter crime, and it is not necessary for the administration of justice. We reiterate our call that the death penalty be abolished.

NAPABA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization representing the interests of well over 80,000 AANHPI legal professionals. Our community is diverse, spanning across cultures, language, and political ideologies. NAPABA has worked diligently with presidents, administrations, and congressional members of both parties to advance the interests of our community.

But as an organization of legal professionals, we bear a special responsibility to uphold the rule of law. Regardless of the presidential administration, NAPABA will continue to advance justice, with the AANHPI community at the forefront along with all communities of color, our values, and our policy positions.

###

The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) represents the interests of over 80,000 AANHPI legal professionals and nearly 90 national, state, and local APA bar associations. NAPABA is a leader in addressing civil rights issues confronting Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities. Through its national network, NAPABA provides a strong voice for increased diversity of the federal and state judiciaries, advocates for equal opportunity in the workplace, works to eliminate hate crimes and anti-immigrant sentiment, and promotes the professional development of people of all backgrounds in the legal profession.

Proudly powered by WordPress