Florida bans Chinese citizens from buying land to counteract Chinese Communist party

[Song Hong]

Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida signed a series of bills Monday that bans Chinese citizens from buying land in the state.

In a recent news release, the Republican announced his signing of that bill and two others which are meant to “counteract” what he described as “the malign influence of the Chinese Communist party in the state of Florida”.

One bill restricts Chinese nationals from buying land in Florida unless they are also American citizens or permanent residents.

Chinese citizens with non-tourist visas, meanwhile, would be limited to buying fewer than two acres of land that is at least five miles away from any military institutions, the Tampa Bay television news outlet

The bill also restricts foreign citizens of other countries from buying land under certain circumstances. Russian, Iranian, Cuban, Syrian, North Korean and Venezuelan citizens are not allowed to purchase land within 10 miles of military bases under the measure but can still buy property elsewhere in Florida, Insider reported.

Critics have warned that the bill could facilitate discrimination against Chinese homeowners in Florida while also harming other immigrants, Axios reported.

Last month, ahead of the bill’s signing, more than 100 protesters testified against the legislation, adding that it would discriminate against Florida’s Chinese population, USA Today reported.

“My concern is this bill will affect people like me who want to own a home,” said Florida college student Victoria Li, through tears. “We’re scared, we’re terrified. That’s what we came here for. We have the American dream. That’s why, at my age, I’m still going to school.”

Other legislation signed on Monday includes a bill that prohibits colleges and universities as well as their employees from accepting gifts while “in their official capacities from a college or university based in a foreign country of concern”, the Hill reported.

Colleges and universities within Florida are also required to get approval from the state’s board of governors or board of education before participating in any agreement or partnership with a university in a foreign country.

An additional bill restricts those using government devices and servers from downloading applications such as TikTok, which is owned by a Chinese company, the Hill added.

“Florida is taking action to stand against the United States’ greatest geopolitical threat – the Chinese Communist party,” DeSantis said.

DeSantis signs bills banning Chinese citizens from buying land in Florida

Republican governor says bills are meant to ‘counteract’ the ‘malign influence of the Chinese Communist party’ in the state

www.theguardian.com

 

[jhungary]

About time, and I am saying it's probably 20 years too late.

Land ownership should only be considered citizens's right, not everyone's right, I don't understand the need or want for foreign citizens to own land outside their own country. And any government allowed something like this to happen

 

[Song Hong]

Not 20 years ago, United States was wrong from the start.

Their immigration policy has shot them in the foot.




Big fish eat small fish, that's the law of nature.

Rich and civilized countries will attract more citizens from third world countries or poorer countries. They want to get education, health care, jobs... everything in the promised land, even taking over the whole thing.

Why doesnt US ban Vietnamese to counteract Vietnam communist?

 

[jhungary]

Not 20 years ago, United States was wrong from the start.

Their immigration policy has shot them in the foot.




Big fish eat small fish, that's the law of nature.

Rich and civilized countries will attract more citizens from third world countries or poorer countries. They want to get education, health care, jobs... everything in the promised land, even taking over the whole thing.

This is not about big fish eat small fish, this is about land right, as much as birth right, in fact, I would be all for any government to raise a level of requirement of residency length or country contribution (ie paying tax) in order to purchase land and not just being a citizen of one's country.

This is about law and should be about law, not money.

 

[Goritoes]

About time, and I am saying it's probably 20 years too late.

Land ownership should only be considered citizens's right, not everyone's right, I don't understand the need or want for foreign citizens to own land outside their own country. And any government allowed something like this to happen

Not a good time to buy land in Florida anyway

 

[jhungary]

Not a good time to buy land in Florida anyway

You means because of De Santis or because of the Flood?

 

[Nan Yang]

Judicial scrutiny could sink new Florida law banning Chinese property ownership​

• Florida has deemed seven nations, including China, ‘foreign countries of concern’ and restricted some real estate purchases by their citizens
• The US Constitution holds that national security is not determined by individual states but by the federal government, say legal experts

Bochen Han in Washington
Published: 5:11am, 11 May, 2023

A new Florida law that restricts property ownership by Chinese citizens might not hold up in court if challenged, legal academics say.
Governor Ron DeSantis, a 2024 Republican presidential hopeful, signed a series of bills on Monday that target “foreign countries of concern” including China, one of which prohibits Chinese citizens from owning any property in Florida, including residential, unless they are US permanent residents or hold a non-tourist US visa.

The law names other countries – Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela and Syria – and restricts their nationals without relevant US legal status from holding agricultural land or property near a military installation. Government officials, political party members and businesses based in the seven countries were also listed as targets for the restrictions.

But Bob Jarvis, a law professor at Florida-based Nova Southeastern University, said it was likely that the law will be ruled unconstitutional before its effective date of July 1.

Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida is also a 2024 Republican presidential hopeful. Photo: EPA-EFE

Jarvis points to the 1952 California Supreme Court case of Fujii vs California, which overturned the state’s Alien Land Law. The statute restricted “aliens ineligible for citizenship” – essentially Asian immigrants at the time – from owning land, and the state Supreme Court found that it violated the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution

The majority opinion, written by the court’s chief justice, noted that the law was “obviously designed and administered as an instrument for effectuating racial discrimination”.
The Florida law, Jarvis said, will be put under similar constitutional scrutiny, especially given its naming of specific groups, and will be struck down if its purpose is shown to “discriminate against one or more people on the basis of national origin”.

Though Florida could argue that it is discriminating based on citizenship rather than national origin, Gabriel Chin, a law professor at the University of California, Davis, said “it can also be said that in this context, it’s the same thing”.

A blanket ban on non-citizens owning land would have a better chance of withstanding judicial review, Chin added. Many US states already have laws limiting foreign investment in land.

Another argument for the law’s unconstitutionality, legal academics say, is that it infringes on the federal government’s exclusive constitutional right to conduct foreign policy.

In lauding the new law, the Florida commissioner of agriculture, Wilton Simpson, said that “restricting China and other hostile foreign nations from controlling Florida’s agricultural land and lands near critical infrastructure facilities protects our state, provides long-term stability and preserves our economic freedom.” Politicians in various states have invoked such rationale to support proposals to limit foreign land ownership.

But according to Chin, who helped repeal historical alien land laws in several states, there’s a “strong argument that it’s up to the federal government to decide how to retaliate economically against China or how to protect military installations from China, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Russia, etc.”

The distinction between state and federal jurisdiction in allowing discrimination is also clear. Chin pointed to cases like Takahashi vs Fish & Game Commission, tested before the US Supreme Court in 1948, which, in his words, found that “even if the federal government can discriminate in various ways, that doesn’t mean the states can”.

The majority opinion in that case explained that “it does not follow … that because the United States regulates immigration and naturalisation in part on the basis of race and colour classifications, a state can adopt one or more of the same classifications”.

Leo Yu, a law professor at Southern Methodist University in Texas, argued while “any sensible law professor will tell you that [the bill is] unconstitutional,” what matters more is “whether the law can pass through a very conservative judiciary”.

But while the conservative-leaning US Supreme Court may be receptive to national security arguments, Jarvis said it would still be handicapped by the fact that “national security is not determined by individual states”.

Federal law does not restrict how much private US agricultural land can be foreign-owned, but bills introduced by national legislators since the start of this Congress seek to change that.

Jarvis said the law was a political prop for DeSantis’s expected challenge to former president Donald Trump for the Republican nomination. One of DeSantis’s problems is that as a governor, he cannot point to any significant international experience, Jarvis said.

“And so this law was passed to help him become president by being able to show that ‘I went ahead and I took serious action against the Chinese Communist Party’,” Jarvis said.
“What we now have is a situation where laws are being passed as political theatre, rather than as statements of serious policy,” he added.

One group that might have legal standing to challenge the law is the state’s real estate interests, Jarvis said. Florida recently become a target for wealthy Chinese who see US property as a solid investment for overseas-earned income and one that is hard for the Chinese government – which imposes stringent capital controls – to touch.

But regardless of how a potential legal battle plays out, the fact that the bill has been signed into law already affects Asian-Americans.
As Beth Lew-Williams, a history professor at Princeton University, wrote in the Los Angeles Times last week, “old alien land laws held profound implications for the Asian community, as does the new bill”.

“They encouraged discrimination in the real estate market, drove segregation of Asian communities and made it more difficult for Asian immigrants to rise out of poverty. And by labelling Asians as unwanted, lawmakers fuelled anti-Asian bias broadly.”

 

[tower9]

Just stupid showboating. Ain't going to do a damn thing and this definitely won't hurt the interests of the Chinese govt.

Chinese citizens make up a miniscule number of buyers in Florida's market. In addition, preventing them from buying land there only helps the Chinese government's efforts to prevent the funneling of capital overseas.

Just another idiotic petty move just for show.

 

[S10]

Meh who wants to live in Florida anyway?

 

[jhungary]

Just stupid showboating. Ain't going to do a damn thing and this definitely won't hurt the interests of the Chinese govt.

Chinese citizens make up a miniscule number of buyers in Florida's market. In addition, preventing them from buying land there only helps the Chinese government's efforts to prevent the funneling of capital overseas.

Just another idiotic petty move just for show.

I don't think he did this to hurt Chinese Government interest, I mean unless Chinese Government fancy buying up land in suburban retired state, this is done to protect land price hike from Chinese investor just like they did with Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia and UK.

Chinese government would want to get properties with strategic value, like next to an air force base or next to NORAD, but those are already cover by Espionage act which forbid foreign ownership of properties next to Federal Sensitive site.

 

[SaadH]

Good move, now California needs the same but should be expanded to all foreigners.

 

[jhungary]

Communist Vietnam hates the United States?
In fact, on the contrary, they love the United States very much.

Anti-American propaganda is their job.
Studying in the US, buying a house in the US, getting a US green card is their dream.
And the most important reason, Vietnam is not a threat to the US.



I am only presenting an objective law.

What I mean is that even if they create hundreds of laws against foreigners buying houses or immigrants, foreigners can still find other tricks to get around the law.

Because America is their promised land, and they will never give up wanting to come to America

That's why I said even citizenship is not enough, you need residency limit and/or contribution to both the state and the federal government before you can own land in America.

 

[Menthol]

Not 20 years ago, United States was wrong from the start.

Their immigration policy has shot them in the foot.




Big fish eat small fish, that's the law of nature.

Rich and civilized countries will attract more citizens from third world countries or poorer countries. They want to get education, health care, jobs... everything in the promised land, even taking over the whole thing.

It's not wrong if you are the big fish.

But it will be wrong if the small fish grow big and bigger than the big fish.

And the table turned.

 

[jhungary]

Good move, now California needs the same but should be expanded to all foreigners.

lol, you think Newsom will do things like this??

I would say it's lucky if they didn't give out land to refugee.

 

[tower9]

I don't think he did this to hurt Chinese Government interest, I mean unless Chinese Government fancy buying up land in suburban retired state, this is done to protect land price hike from Chinese investor just like they did with Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia and UK.

Chinese government would want to get properties with strategic value, like next to an air force base or next to NORAD, but those are already cover by Espionage act which forbid foreign ownership of properties next to Federal Sensitive site.

He did this out of pure spite and showboating.

None of the threats you mentioned are actual or real. NONE.