A US federal appeal court has paved the way for Florida to enforce a law restricting real estate purchases by Chinese citizens, rejecting arguments that it conflicts with federal law or is discriminatory.
The 2-1 ruling by the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta on Tuesday could embolden other states to enact similar laws, which critics say mirror early 20th century “alien land” laws that restricted property ownership by Chinese and Japanese nationals.
Six states are currently considering 22 bills that would restrict foreign property ownership in some way as of the end of last month, according to the Committee of 100, a non-profit group of prominent Chinese-Americans. Over two dozen states, including Texas, already have such laws in place.
The plaintiffs had asked the court to block enforcement of the 2023 Florida law while their challenge moved through the District Court, but Tuesday’s decision allows the law to remain in effect as the case proceeds.
The 11th Circuit said four Chinese citizens represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) did not have legal standing to sue because the SB 264 law only applies to people “domiciled” in China.
The plaintiffs are not considered as such, as they have lived in Florida for years and hope to remain in the US.
The court also rejected claims that provisions of the law requiring Chinese citizens in the state to register their properties conflict with a federal law governing foreign investments and were motivated by racism against Chinese people and Asians.
“National, individual, land and food security concerns motivated SB 264’s enactment,” Circuit Judge Robert Luck wrote.
A different 11th Circuit panel last year approved temporary relief from the law for two of the plaintiffs after a Florida District Court ruled against their motion to block it preliminarily.
The law prohibits individuals who are “domiciled” in China and are not US citizens or green card holders from purchasing property or land in Florida.
It allows non-tourist visa holders and asylum recipients to purchase a single residential property as big as two acres (0.8 hectares) that is at least five miles (8 km) from any military installation. It also restricts citizens of Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria and Venezuela, to a lesser extent.
Violations involving Chinese buyers also carry particularly severe penalties, with up to five years in prison for buyers and up to one year for sellers.
Tuesday’s development comes as US-China tensions have cascaded through local and state politics across the US in recent years, sparking alarm about Chinese investment. Much of the concern initially focused on Chinese involvement in the agricultural sector but has since broadened in scope.
In July, US Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced a plan to work with states to restrict land purchases by foreign entities nationwide and to increase scrutiny of contracts with them.
Republican Governor Ron DeSantis said when he signed the law in 2023 that it was part of the state’s effort to stand up to the Communist Party, which he called the “greatest geopolitical threat” to the US.
Luck on Tuesday was joined by Circuit Judge Barbara Lagoa, a fellow appointee of Republican President Donald Trump.
Circuit Judge Charles Wilson, an appointee of former Democratic President Bill Clinton, dissented, saying the regulation of foreign investment is “a quintessentially federal arena”, and calling SB 264 “part of a modern resurgence of ‘alien land laws’”.
The ACLU said it was disappointed with the outcome but noted it would continue its fight.
“All people, regardless of where they come from, should be free to buy homes and build lives in Florida without fear of discrimination,” said Ashley Gorski, a senior staff lawyer with the group’s National Security Project.
Asian-American groups condemned the court’s decision on Tuesday.
“SB 264 explicitly discriminates against Chinese immigrants, and it has broader chilling effects on Asian-Americans in Florida who simply want to buy a home,” said Clay Zhu, president of Chinese-American Legal Defence Alliance.
“SB 264 is not just unconstitutional – it hearkens back to discredited century-old alien land laws that told generations of Asian-Americans that this country was not their home,” said Bethany Li, executive director of the Asian-American Legal Defence and Education Fund.
“But our communities survived those past assaults on our rights, and we remain. We will continue to fight back for the dignity and belonging we deserve.”
Efforts to restrict Chinese land ownership have faced opposition in multiple states.
A challenge to a similar law was launched in Texas, where a federal court also found that the plaintiffs did not have the legal right to sue. — SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST