Tag: Fourteenth Amendment

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

NAPABA Applauds SCOTUS Birthright Citizenship Decision in Trump v. Barbara

For Immediate Release:
June 30, 2026		Contact:
[email protected]

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the fundamental constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship. In Trump v. Barbara, the Court found that Executive Order 14160, which sought to limit the scope of birthright citizenship, did not comply with the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) applauds the Court’s decision. It upheld what NAPABA has emphasized throughout the litigation: a constitutional right that the Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) community has understood and relied upon for nearly 130 years—ever since a young Chinese American fought for his birthright citizenship in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). The Fourteenth Amendment promises every person equal treatment under the law and includes an equal claim of citizenship for persons born in the United States, regardless of the circumstances of their parents. EO 14160 attempted to upend that promise, and we are grateful that the Court invalidated it.

In three federal courts of appeals and in the Supreme Court, NAPABA led a nationwide coalition of its affiliates and national associates to defend birthright citizenship in this litigation. We underscored the significance of Wong Kim Ark, the crucial role of Asian Americans in shaping our nation’s immigration and civil rights jurisprudence, and the disproportionate impacts that EO 14160 would have on AANHPI communities.  NAPABA highlighted how the congressional debates over the Fourteenth Amendment contemplated that the children of Chinese migrants, despite being heavily despised and vilified, would receive birthright citizenship.  Lastly, we maintained that the federal government distorted the holding of Wong Kim Ark and created a faulty legal and historical analogy that Chinese migrants in the late 19th century were akin to today’s lawful permanent residents (i.e., green card holders).

NAPABA is thankful to its legal team for their exemplary work: Rahat N. Babar, who serves as NAPABA’s Deputy Executive Director and General Counsel, Edgar Chen, who serves as NAPABA’s Special Policy Advisor, Chris M. Kwok, who formerly served as co-chair of NAPABA’s Dispute Resolution Committee, and Seyfarth Shaw LLP (Wendy M. Feng, Owen Wolfe, and Lori Chen).

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.

Proudly powered by WordPress