US government employee barred from leaving China, Washington says
The employee of the US Patent and Trademark Office, an agency within the US Department of Commerce, was subject to an 'exit ban' while travelling in China in a 'personal capacity', the US Department of State said on Monday.
'The Department of State has no higher priority than the safety and security of American citizens,' a State Department spokesperson said in a statement.
'We are tracking this case very closely and are engaged with Chinese officials to resolve the situation as quickly as possible.'
The statement comes after The Washington Post on Sunday reported that a Chinese-American man employed by the US Commerce Department was barred from leaving China after failing to disclose his work for the government on a visa application.
The report, which cited four unnamed people familiar with the matter, said the employee had travelled to China several months ago to visit family.
The Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post on Sunday reported that the man, a naturalised US citizen, was detained in Chengdu, Sichuan, in April over 'actions Beijing deemed harmful to national security'. The Post's report cited an unnamed 'source familiar with the matter'.
The Chinese Embassy in Washington, DC, referred Al Jazeera to remarks made by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Guo Jiakun, on Monday, in which he said he had 'no details to share' on the case.
'China upholds the rule of law and handles entry and exit affairs in accordance with the law,' Guo said at a regular media briefing.
Washington's confirmation of the exit ban comes after Beijing on Monday said it had blocked the departure of a US citizen employed by the banking giant Wells Fargo.
China's Foreign Ministry said that Chenyue Mao, an Atlanta-based managing director, was subject to an exit ban due to her involvement in an unspecified criminal case.
Washington and Beijing have long traded accusations of espionage and meddling in each other's domestic affairs.
On Monday, the US Department of Justice said that a Chinese-born US researcher had pleaded guilty to stealing trade secrets, including blueprints for infrared sensors designed to detect nuclear missile launches and track ballistic missiles.
Prosecutors said Chenguang Gong, a dual US-Chinese citizen, transferred more than 3,600 company files to his personal storage devices during his employment with a Los Angeles-based research and development firm.
Before taking up work with the company, Gong had travelled to China several times to seek funding to develop technology with military applications, prosecutors said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
37 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Doctor accused of supplying actor Matthew Perry with ketamine pleads guilty
Doctor Salvador Plasencia has pleaded guilty to illegally supplying the drug ketamine to Matthew Perry, star of the hit television show Friends, in the lead-up to the actor's 2023 overdose and death in the United States. On Wednesday, Plasencia appeared before the federal court of Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett in Los Angeles to enter his plea as part of a deal with prosecutors. Plasencia had previously pleaded not guilty. But as his trial date approached in August, he and his defence lawyers reached an agreement that would see his legal jeopardy lowered. In exchange for having Plasencia plead guilty to four counts of illegally distributing ketamine, prosecutors dropped three additional counts of illegal distribution and two counts of falsifying records. When questioned by Judge Garnett, Plasencia indicated his lawyers had exhausted all their options for pleas and sentencing: 'They've considered everything.' In a statement afterwards, one of his lawyers, Debra White, conveyed Plasencia's regrets and indicated the doctor would no longer practice medicine professionally. 'Dr Plasencia is profoundly remorseful for the treatment decisions he made while providing ketamine to Matthew Perry,' White said. 'He is fully accepting responsibility by pleading guilty to drug distribution. Dr Plasencia intends to voluntarily surrender his medical license, acknowledging his failure to protect Mr Perry, a patient who was especially vulnerable due to addiction.' Perry — best known for his role as Chandler Bing on the show Friends — died on October 28, 2023, in a hot tub at his home in the Pacific Palisades neighbourhood of Los Angeles, California. He was 54 years old. An autopsy report released in December of that year credited Perry's death to the 'acute effects' of ketamine, while acknowledging other factors. Perry's coronary artery disease, for example, likely contributed to his death, as well as his long-term struggles with drug use. Perry had been legally using ketamine to treat his depression. But faced with limits to the amount he could be prescribed, Perry reportedly started to seek additional sources of the drug outside of legal channels. Plasencia did not supply Perry with the fatal dose of ketamine, according to prosecutors. But in court on Wednesday, he did acknowledge he provided Perry with ketamine in the month leading up to his death, including 20 vials that contained a total of 100 milligrammes of the drug. The doctor also admitted to administering one injection and watching Perry's blood pressure spike. He also said he left some for Perry's assistant to inject. In court filings from a separate case, fellow doctor Mark Chavez accused Plasencia of recruiting him to supply ketamine to sell to Perry. 'I wonder how much this moron will pay,' Plasencia allegedly said in a text message to Chavez. Prosecutors said the ketamine sale netted $4,500. Plasencia is the fourth defendant to plead guilty to charges related to Perry's death. A fifth defendant, Jasveen Sangha, has pleaded not guilty. Authorities have accused Sangha of giving Perry his fatal dose and say she was a drug dealer known as the 'ketamine queen'. Her trial will begin in August.
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump White House probes Harvard University's scholar exchange programme
The administration of United States President Donald Trump has launched a new investigation against Harvard University, this time targeted at an exchange programme that allows foreign scholars to visit the elite school. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a statement on Wednesday saying the probe was necessary to ensure US security — but the investigation is likely to be seen by critics as the latest attempt to bully the school into compliance with President Donald Trump's policies. 'The American people have the right to expect their universities to uphold national security, comply with the law, and provide safe environments for all students,' Rubio wrote in the statement. 'The investigation will ensure that State Department programs do not run contrary to our nation's interests.' At stake is Harvard's exchange visitor programme, which allows professors, students and researchers to come to the US on a temporary basis. Participating scholars receive a J-1 visa, which allows them to participate in cultural and academic exchange programmes on the basis that they are coming to the US not as immigrants but as visitors. But Harvard's ability to host such a programme is contingent on the State Department's approval. Rubio suggested that the school's 'continued eligibility as a sponsor' would hang in the balance of Wednesday's investigation. 'To maintain their privilege to sponsor exchange visitors, sponsors must comply with all regulations, including conducting their programs in a manner that does not undermine the foreign policy objectives or compromise the national security interests of the United States,' Rubio wrote. Questions of national security Under President Trump's second term, the US has repeatedly cited questions of national security and foreign policy in its attempts to expel foreign students, particularly those involved in pro-Palestinian and antiwar movements. Rubio himself has drawn on the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 — a relatively obscure Cold War-era law — in his efforts to deport student protest leaders like Mahmoud Khalil. The law allows the secretary of state to expel foreign nationals 'whose presence or activities' could pose 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States'. The government's use of such laws, however, is currently being challenged in court. Critics argue they violate the constitutional right to free speech and protest. It was President Trump's opposition to the pro-Palestinian protests that led him to engage in a high-profile confrontation with Harvard, the country's oldest university and a member of the much-vaunted Ivy League. Schools like Harvard in Massachusetts and Columbia University in New York were considered the epicentre of the protest movement. At Columbia, for instance, students erected a tent encampment that inspired similar demonstrations across the world. The schools' crackdowns on those protests, however, were also emulated at other campuses. Columbia, for instance, called in police to clear pro-Palestinian demonstrators, and other schools took similar action, leading to more than 3,000 campus arrests across the country last year. Critics of the protests, including President Trump, have called the demonstrations anti-Semitic and warned they create an unsafe learning environment for Jewish students. Protest leaders, however, point out that most of the demonstrations were peaceful and have forcefully rejected anti-Jewish hate. Rather, they argue their protests are about shining a light on the abuses Israel has perpetrated in Gaza — and the crackdowns are aimed at stamping out views that run contrary to the US's close relationship with Israel. Pressure on schools Upon taking office in January, however, Trump pledged to take 'forceful and unprecedented steps' to root out alleged anti-Semitism on campus. In early March, he began his broadside on Ivy League campuses like Columbia and Harvard. He began by stripping Columbia of $400m in federal contracts and grants and then by requesting compliance with a list of demands, including disciplinary reform and external oversight for certain academic departments. By March 22, Columbia had agreed to make concessions. But Trump encountered greater resistance at Harvard University. On April 11, the Trump administration likewise issued a list of demands that would have required Harvard to commit to 'structural and personnel changes' to foster 'viewpoint diversity', eliminate its diversity programmes and agree to external audits. It refused. Instead, Harvard President Alan Garber said such requests would violate Harvard's rights as a private institution committed to academic freedom. Since then, the Trump administration has stripped Harvard of billions of dollars in federal contracts, research funding and grants. A federal court in Boston began hearing a legal challenge against that decision this week. A multipronged attack But the Trump administration has also explored other avenues to pressure Harvard into compliance. Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status — though critics warn it would be illegal to do so — and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem blocked Harvard from accessing the Student and Exchange Visitor Programme (SEVP), a system that schools are required to use to enrol international students. Foreign students make up about a quarter of Harvard's student body. Losing access to the SEVP system effectively meant those students were no longer able to attend the school. Harvard challenged the Trump administration's ban on its foreign students in court and received a preliminary injunction that allows its international students to remain while the case plays out. But other hurdles have since emerged. Earlier this month, for instance, the Trump administration accused Harvard of civil rights violations and called for a review of its accreditation, the industry-wide quality standard that gives university diplomas their value. Meanwhile, news outlets have reported that officials from the Trump administration and Harvard continue to negotiate over whether a deal can be struck to defuse the ongoing tensions.
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Why is Columbia University expelling pro-Palestine students?
The United States's prestigious Columbia University has punished nearly 80 students who took part in protests against Israel's war on Gaza with expulsions, one-to-three-year suspensions, and degree revocations. The University's Judicial Board stated on Tuesday that it had completed disciplinary hearings for the May 7, 2025, Butler Library demonstration on its campus and the May 31, 2024, 'Revolt for Rafah' encampment during the university's annual alumni weekend. In 2024, pro-Palestinian student encampments at Columbia University became a flashpoint for a global wave of campus protests against Israel's war in Gaza. The movement drew national attention before university administrators called NYPD officers to dismantle the camps, resulting in dozens of arrests. 'Suspension from Columbia for protesting genocide is the highest honour,' said Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), an umbrella coalition of student groups, in a post on X. 'We reject that Columbia has any reputation worth upholding and we categorically state that we do not wish to uphold it,' the student body said. So, why has Columbia expelled these students? And why has the Trump administration clamped down on universities? What has happened? Columbia University has disciplined nearly 80 students for their participation in pro-Palestinian protests – to 'separate them from the University'. The disciplinary action follows a series of demonstrations on campus, including a student-led occupation of Butler Library during final exams on May 7 earlier this year. The NYPD arrested 78 individuals that day. The protests are part of a call for the university to divest from companies linked to the Israeli military, cut all financial ties with Israel, and express solidarity with Palestinians amid the continuing war in Gaza. According to student organisers, the suspended students took part in a 'peaceful teach-in' which included readings and discussions about Palestinian writer and activist Basil al-Araj, killed by Israeli forces in 2017. The mass disciplinary action, described as the biggest of its kind in Columbia's history, has sparked backlash from civil liberties groups and fellow students. Organisers argue the crackdown is part of a broader effort to suppress pro-Palestinian activism on US campuses and have linked it to a pending agreement between Columbia and Trump administration officials. The University's student newspaper, Columbia Spectator, reported that the majority of students received a two-year suspension. The students have reportedly been asked to apologise to the university before they can be allowed to return to campus. Earlier this year, the Trump administration announced it would withhold approximately $400m in funding for Columbia University, citing the institution's alleged failure to adequately address anti-Semitism amid pro-Palestinian protests on campus. That move prompted Columbia to concede to a list of demands laid down by the government in return for negotiations to reinstate its funding. Among other concessions, the university agreed to ban face masks and to empower 36 campus police officers with special powers to arrest students. What has Columbia said? In a statement published on Tuesday, the University stated that the disruption at Butler Library during reading period had affected hundreds of students and subsequently led to the interim suspension of Columbia participants. The University said sanctions would include probation, suspensions ranging from one year to three years, degree revocations, and expulsions. It did not state how many faced each of these sanctions, nor did it reveal any of the students' identities, citing student privacy. 'Our institution must focus on delivering on its academic mission for our community. And to create a thriving academic community, there must be respect for each other and the institution's fundamental work, policies, and rules,' the statement noted. 'Disruptions to academic activities are in violation of University policies and Rules, and such violations will necessarily generate consequences.' How have students responded? News of the suspensions and expulsions came on the same day that Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University protest leader targeted for deportation by President Donald Trump, met with lawmakers in Washington, DC, just over a month after the 30-year-old, a legal permanent resident of the United States, was released from immigration custody in Louisiana. Khalil continues to face deportation under the Trump administration, which has relied on an obscure provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 in its attempts to expel international students involved in pro-Palestinian advocacy. In response to the suspensions and expulsion announced by Columbia on Tuesday, the student activist group Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD), an umbrella coalition of student groups, noted that while 'the US and Israel starve 2.1 million Gazans to death, Columbia has worked diligently with [Trump's administration] to suspend dozens of students for pro-Palestine activism'. The group noted the suspensions were the highest ever for a single political protest in Columbia's history and 'hugely exceed sentencing precedent for teach-ins or non-Palestine-related building occupations'. 'Students remain committed to ending US- and Columbia-backed Israeli genocide regardless of the school's sanctions,' the student body said in its statement. Quoting a testimony from students' July disciplinary hearings, the group reiterated: 'Every university in Gaza has been destroyed. Hundreds of academics have been killed. Books and archives have been incinerated. Entire families have been erased from the civil registry. This is not a war. It is a campaign of erasure.' 'We will not be deterred. We are committed to the struggle for Palestinian liberation,' the statement quoted students in conclusion. Why has Trump clamped down on universities? The antiwar protests against Israel's war on Gaza, which spread across US university campuses from Columbia and UCLA to Harvard, last year have drawn comparisons with the anti-Vietnam War era, when student activism directly challenged US foreign policy. Trump has capitalised on this by painting students as part of a left-wing, anti-Semitic revolt and clamping down on universities, particularly 'elite' institutions. The administration argues that universities have failed to protect Jewish students from harassment and violence during demonstrations, citing incidents of encampments and chants deemed anti-Semitic. Since early 2025, the administration has targeted more than 50 universities, including Columbia, with investigations by the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. This has been coupled with executive orders and actions, such as freezing billions in federal research grants and threatening to revoke tax-exempt status or accreditation, as seen in demands placed on Harvard and Columbia. Harvard's rejection of demands that its programmes be audited for 'ideological capture' led to billions of dollars in federal funding being frozen. The administration also threatened to bar international students from Harvard, citing 'national security' and high campus crime rates, which underscores the White House's chokehold over the universities. Harvard has sued the administration and secured a federal judge's temporary block on the order to bar international students. The policies under the Trump administration also reflect its general opposition to perceived liberal biases in higher education, as it aims to dismantle 'woke' culture and promote conservative values. It has also targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programmes operated by universities and other workplaces, accusing them of promoting division and 'reverse discrimination'.
