FBI Raid, Sudden Termination of Indiana University Professor Underscore Renewed Scrutiny of Chinese Scientists in the United States
In late March 2025, FBI agents raided the homes of Dr. Xiaofeng Wang, a tenured professor of computer science at Indiana University Bloomington, and his wife, Nianli Ma, who worked as a library analyst at the university. Hours later, both were fired from their respective positions without a formal explanation. The university later stated it was informed of a federal investigation but cited instructions from the FBI in declining to elaborate further.
On April 22, the Wall Street Journal noted that the raids and firings came days after the Chair of the House Select Committee on China sent a letter to the presidents of six universities, requesting information on their policies regarding the enrollment of Chinese national students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (“STEM”) programs – which he explained by saying in a statement that “America’s student visa system has become a Trojan horse for Beijing.” Days before that, the “Stop Chinese Communist Prying by Vindicating Intellectual Safeguards in Academia Act (Stop CCP VISAs Act)” – legislation that would bar Chinese nationals from receiving visas allowing them to study in U.S. schools – was introduced in the House. In January, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said in a hearing that “Chinese students here in the U.S. are . . . here studying STEM and national security issues. And each one of them, whether they like it or not, is an agent of the Chinese Communist Party.”
These developments ring a familiar, concerning bell for many U.S. academics and researchers who remember the “China Initiative” – an effort that some in Congress are currently seeking to revive. Wang, a prominent cybersecurity expert who has led research projects totaling nearly $23 million in grant funding over the past two decades, had been on the faculty at Indiana University since 2004. Sources indicate that, prior to the raid, the university had been examining Wang’s connections to a 2017 Chinese grant of which he was reportedly unaware.
The now-defunct China Initiative was a U.S. Department of Justice program launched in 2018, ostensibly to combat economic espionage. It drew widespread criticism for disproportionately targeting Chinese and Chinese-American scientists. Although the Biden administration shuttered that program – citing concerns over racial profiling – the recent legislative proposals outlined above demonstrate a renewed appetite in Congress for a renewal of its aggressive tactics, perhaps under a different name.
As U.S.-China geopolitical tensions continue to rise, so does the risk of overreach resulting in career scientists and researchers with ties to China and other countries being caught in the crosshairs of national security enforcement, often without clear allegations of wrongdoing. Universities, meanwhile, find themselves caught between compliance pressures and obligations to protect their faculty members’ rights. In the month since the FBI raids of Wang’s homes, more than 700 U.S.-based scholars have signed a letter denouncing Indiana University's decision to fire Wang without due process, calling it a problematic precedent.
The implications of Wang’s case and others like it are far-reaching. Chinese nationals make up the largest share of international doctoral students in STEM fields, and Chinese and Chinese-American scholars have long contributed to the vitality and innovation of U.S. research, academia, and industry. With university faculty members of Chinese descent facing renewed fears that professional success and international partnerships could invite government suspicion, the current climate threatens to reverse decades of progress in global scientific exchange.
At Post & Schell, we have deep experience representing scientists, scholars, and institutions facing legal scrutiny arising from alleged international affiliations. If you have received a government inquiry, or if your institution is grappling with questions about foreign collaborations and compliance risks, we can help. As this case makes clear, transparency and due process must remain central to any legitimate national security efforts.
Disclaimer: This post does not offer specific legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. You should not reach any legal conclusions based on the information contained in this post without first seeking the advice of counsel.