Professor, Scrutinized for Ties to China, Sues to Get His Job Back

The ordeal of chemistry professor Feng Tao, also known as Franklin, appeared to have finally come to an end.

Five years had passed since F.B.I. agents escorted him out of his home in Lawrence, Kansas. As the first professor arrested under a Trump-era initiative targeting alleged Chinese economic espionage, Dr. Tao was accused of concealing his affiliation with a Chinese university while conducting federally funded research at the University of Kansas, where he held a tenured position.

In July, he won his legal battle. A federal appeals court overturned the final conviction against him. His wife, Hong Peng, recalled in an interview that she had hoped this meant her husband could return to his laboratory and that their family might regain some sense of normalcy.

Yet, the University of Kansas has not reinstated him.

Now, Dr. Tao, a Chinese citizen and permanent U.S. resident, is suing the university for wrongful termination. He alleges that the institution unlawfully monitored him on behalf of federal investigators and violated its own faculty disciplinary procedures by dismissing him before his criminal case had concluded.

“The university allowed itself to be swept up in fearmongering and a racist witch hunt,” stated a complaint filed by Dr. Tao’s legal team in January in a federal court in Kansas.

The University of Kansas has not responded to requests for comment.

Dr. Tao’s case highlights the lingering effects of the now-defunct China Initiative, a Justice Department program officially terminated more than three years ago. The initiative disproportionately impacted professors and researchers of Chinese descent, leaving a lasting impact on the academic community.

During its three-year span, the F.B.I. pursued at least a dozen cases at universities and research institutions, primarily targeting scholars of Chinese heritage. None of these cases resulted in charges of economic espionage, trade secret theft, or intellectual property violations.

Critics argued that the initiative unfairly singled out scientists based on ethnicity and blurred the distinction between disclosure policy violations and actual espionage. Many of the cases against Chinese-descended academics ultimately collapsed.

Yet concerns are growing that a second Trump administration could revive the China Initiative.

Congress is currently considering an appropriations bill that would direct funding toward a Justice Department program focused on countering Chinese espionage, including in academia. Additionally, just last week, Republican lawmakers reintroduced a bill proposing the establishment of a “CCP Initiative”—referring to the Chinese Communist Party—under the Justice Department to combat Chinese espionage.

“President Joe Biden recklessly ended the China Initiative that President Trump introduced during his first term,” stated Senator Rick Scott of Florida, a co-sponsor of the bill. “Now, President Trump is back to ensure Communist China is held fully accountable for exploiting the United States.”

There is widespread recognition that China has attempted to acquire American technology, including through the recruitment of overseas scientists.

Chinese collaborations with U.S.-funded researchers and universities have contributed to Beijing’s advancements in fields such as hypersonics, nuclear weapons, artificial intelligence, and semiconductors, according to a report released last fall by a congressional committee focused on China-related threats.

While American universities have disputed parts of this report, many have already begun severing ties with Chinese institutions. In January, for instance, the University of Michigan ended its partnership with a Chinese university.

Meanwhile, some lawmakers have voiced concerns over the large number of Chinese students studying science and engineering in the U.S., at times using rhetoric that critics describe as fearmongering.

“The reality is, Chinese students here in the U.S. aren’t studying ancient Greek history—they’re here for STEM and national security-related fields,” said Senator James Risch, Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in January. “And whether they like it or not, every one of them is an agent of the Chinese Communist Party.”

Critics argue that efforts to counter Chinese espionage should be more precisely targeted. They warn that broad, indiscriminate measures could undermine U.S. national security by driving away valuable talent that is crucial for maintaining technological and scientific leadership.

“There are real security threats that must be addressed, but this issue requires a scalpel, not a sledgehammer,” said Gisela Perez Kusakawa, executive director of the New York-based Asian American Scholar Forum.

A 2022 survey of scholars of Chinese descent found that 45% of those who had previously received federal grants now intended to avoid applying for them in the future. Many cited fears that accepting such funding could expose them to racial profiling and unnecessary scrutiny.

Since 2017, research collaborations between U.S. and Chinese academics have also declined. Some fear that broader restrictions—like those recommended by House Republicans in last year’s report—could isolate American scientists from fields where China already holds an advantage, such as materials science, hypersonics, and nanotechnology.

Caroline Wagner, a public policy professor at Ohio State University who advises the government on research security, warned that in the open world of scientific research, blocking China’s access to certain technologies might ultimately prove counterproductive. “Efforts to curb China’s technological progress could end up being shortsighted,” she said.

Federal funding agencies and universities have recently introduced clearer guidelines on disclosure requirements for academics—a step Dr. Wagner sees as a more effective approach than resurrecting the China Initiative. “Given the infrastructure that’s now in place, I’m not sure there’s even a need for the China Initiative anymore,” she added.

Critics argue that Dr. Tao’s case exemplifies how academic integrity concerns have been weaponized to support baseless espionage accusations.

Raised in a rural village in southwest China, Dr. Tao moved to the U.S. in 2002 to pursue a Ph.D. in chemistry at Princeton University. He later held positions at several universities before being recruited by the University of Kansas in 2014 as a tenured faculty member.

Known for his rigorous work ethic, Dr. Tao continued publishing research even after being suspended without pay, producing dozens of papers despite the allegations. However, his legal battles have left him with millions of dollars in legal fees.

According to his lawsuit, the F.B.I. began investigating him based on a false accusation from a disgruntled visiting scholar. During the probe, authorities discovered that Dr. Tao had received a job offer from Fuzhou University in China—an offer he had not disclosed to the University of Kansas.

Dr. Tao had traveled to China to set up a lab and recruit staff for the university while telling Kansas officials he was in Germany. However, he maintained that he had no obligation to report the offer, as he had neither accepted payment nor signed an employment contract with Fuzhou University.

Despite this, prosecutors charged Dr. Tao with fraud, alleging that he misled his university and two federal funding agencies—the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy—by failing to disclose his affiliation with the Chinese institution.

A jury convicted him on three counts of wire fraud and one count of making a false statement. However, in 2022, a federal judge dismissed the fraud charges, citing a lack of evidence that Dr. Tao had financially benefited from his work in China.

“This is not an espionage case,” said U.S. District Judge Julie Robinson. “If it were, the prosecution presented absolutely no evidence to support it.”

Then, in 2024, a federal appeals court vacated the remaining false statement conviction, ruling that Dr. Tao’s nondisclosure had not influenced any actual funding decisions.

In his lawsuit seeking reinstatement, Dr. Tao accuses the University of Kansas of racial discrimination, arguing that other professors who were not of Chinese descent had engaged in similar undisclosed foreign collaborations without facing termination. The lawsuit also claims that the university violated its own policies by failing to hold a proper hearing regarding his employment status.

Beyond reinstatement, Dr. Tao is seeking compensation for lost wages, reimbursement for legal expenses, and damages for emotional distress and reputational harm.

“We don’t get to choose the country we were born in,” said his wife, an American citizen. “What we’ve been through—this is racial profiling, plain and simple.”