Committee of 100’s alien land law map, as well as the March 4 webinar, were featured in this story by The Visible Together.
Committee of 100’s ongoing effort to identify and monitor legislation that restricts property ownership by foreign governments, businesses, and people shows a continuing effort by state governments and Congress to limit the ability of such entities to own property in the U.S.
As of March 17, 2025:
- 27 states are currently considering 84 bills that would restrict foreign property ownership in some way;
- U.S. Congress is currently considering 7 bills;
- 22 states have passed 38 bills that restrict foreign property ownership, 17 of which passed into law in 2024.
Since 2021:
- 42 states have introduced 323 bills restricting property ownership by foreign entities;
- U.S. Congress has introduced 49 such bills;
- From 2021 to 2023, only 23 were considered. In 2023, the rate increased dramatically; 130 bills were considered in 2023 and 124 bills were considered in 2024;
- Of the 372 bills that have been introduced by states and Congress since 2021, 236 (63%) include provisions that prohibit Chinese citizens from owning some form of property, 18 of which explicitly and singly target China and Chinese citizens from owning some form of property;
- Of the 38 bills that have been passed into law, 1 bill: Florida’s SB 264, enacted in 2023, includes provisions that single out Chinese citizens and prohibits non-permanent residents from owning any form of property in the state.
Committee of 100 believes that passage of bills prohibiting property ownership by citizens of foreign countries legitimizes harmful and xenophobic claims about immigrants that exacerbate anti-Asian violence that has negatively affected U.S. citizens and non-citizens alike. This legislation also disproportionately affects a wide range of people of color living in the United States; most of the countries targeted in this legislation are majority non-white.
Interactive map
Altogether, these bills include provisions that encompass a wide range of restrictions on an extensive variety of properties by a large array of foreign entities and their respective countries. The interactive mapping tool below illustrates legislative activity by state governments and Congress pertaining to restriction of property ownership by foreign citizens, businesses, and governments, especially those related to the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The mapping tool below allows users to navigate across this legislative landscape by specifying the combination of provisions they are interested in through the dropdown menus above the map. The map then highlights the intersection of the selected provisions. Clicking a state (or “U.S.,” which refers to federal legislation considered by the U.S. Congress) provides a detailed summary of all legislation currently being considered or passed into law, as well as any state-constitutional provisions related to foreign property ownership. Note that failed bills are included in the statistics described above (among bills that have been introduced) but are excluded from the map simply to reduce congestion in the state summary box. Additionally, to highlight constitutional provisions, all other menu menu selections must be omitted.
Data explorer
The data explorer below the map allows users to view the legislative landscape in a second way; by selecting a bill status and provision category, users may view the distribution of provisions contained in bills for a given bill status-provision category combination. For instance, the default selections show the distribution of foreign country groups among bills currently being considered by state legislatures and Congress; of the 91 total bills currently being considered, 34 contain provisions that restrict property ownership by Foreign Adversaries. The glossary below the apps detail the terms used.
The following template illustrates the general formula of restrictions specified in each bill: Some entity (e.g. governments, nonresident aliens) belonging to some country(ies) (e.g. all foreign countries, foreign adversaries, PRC) are restricted from having some interest (e.g. prohibited from owning, leasing, or are regulated in some other way) in some property (e.g. all real property, agricultural property, state land).
Interactive map
Data explorer
Glossary of terms
Entity types
- Government: A country’s government and affiliated governmental entities, which includes entities that are sponsored, funded, controlled, or owned by the government.
- Businesses: Businesses, companies, corporations, or other organizations that are headquartered in, or organized under the laws of, a foreign country.
- Nonresident aliens: Individual citizens of foreign countries that are not permanent U.S. residents and/or who are domiciled in a foreign country.
- Resident aliens: Individual citizens of foreign countries that are permanent U.S. residents and/or permanent residents of the state.
Foreign country groups
- All foreign countries: All non-U.S. countries.
- Foreign Adversaries: Governments of foreign countries identified by the Secretary of Commerce as having “engaged in a long-term pattern or serious instances of conduct significantly adverse to the national security of the United States or security and safety of United States persons,” which includes (as of 2025): People’s Republic of China, Republic of Cuba, Islamic Republic of Iran, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela under the regime of Nicolás Maduro.
- Countries of Particular Concern: Countries designated by the Secretary of State under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 as having a government that “has engaged in or tolerated ’particularly severe violations of religious freedom,’” which includes (as of 2025): Burma, People’s Republic of China, Republic of Cuba, Eritrea, Islamic Republic of Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan.
- Threat-Assessed countries: Countries identified by the Director of National Intelligence in the Director’s Annual Threat Assessment report as “the most direct, serious threats to the United States,” which includes (as of the 2024 report): People’s Republic of China, Russian Federation, Islamic Republic of Iran, and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
- ITAR countries: Countries identified in 22 C.F.R. § 126.1 as being denied “licenses and other approvals for exports and imports of defense articles and defense services, destined for or originating in certain countries,” which (as of 2024) includes Republic of Belarus, Burma, People’s Republic of China, Republic of Cuba, Islamic Republic of Iran, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Syrian Arab Republic, and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
- Sanctioned countries: Countries and other entities identified by the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control’s Sanctioned Programs and Country List.
- State Sponsors of Terrorism: “Countries determined by the Secretary of State to have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism,” which includes (as of 2025): Republic of Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Islamic Republic of Iran, and Syrian Arab Republic.
- Hostile countries: This term is particular to Arizona’s SB 1066 (2025), and is not defined outside of the following language: “[…] foreign entity that is hostile to the United States […]”.
- China identified: The People’s Republic of China is explicitly included in a custom list of countries restricted from property ownership.
- Only China: The People’s Republic of China is singly identified as the country restricted from property ownership.
Restrictions
- Ownership prohibited: Prohibition of purchase and/or ownership of property.
- Lease and/or rental prohibited: prohibition of rental and/or lease of property.
- Other regular: Various regulations that do not directly prohibit buying, owning, renting, or leasing property, including reporting, monitoring, conducting studies about, and increasing penalties for foreign property ownership.
Property types
- All real property: All real estate and real property, sometimes including water rights and/or mineral rights belonging to the property.
- Agricultural land and/or natural resources: Real property that is used for farming, ranching, or timber production, and/or zoned for agricultural use. Restrictions of this category may or may not also include natural resource rights belonging to the property.
- Sensitive land: Real property located within a certain (and variable) distance of a military facility and/or critical infrastructure.
- Residential property: Real property that is zoned as residential property.
- Commercial property: Real property used for business or commercial use, and/or zoned for such use.
- State land: Real property owned by and/or under the control of a state.
State constitution
- Restrictions: Includes restrictions of foreign property ownership directly in the state constitution.
- Allows/directs statutory restrictions: Includes provisions that either direct or allow the legislature to enact laws that restrict foreign property ownership.
- Protections: Includes affirmative property rights to some group directly in the state constitution.
Committee of 100 would like to thank Harrison M. Pittman, Director of The National Agricultural Law Center and the Boston University School of Law’s Antiracism & Community Lawyering Practicum and the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law & Equality for their research that has greatly aided this project. If you have a comment or know of new bills that have recently been proposed, please email Committee of 100 Research and Data Scientist Sam Collitt at scollitt@Committee100.org.
Latest News
Committee of 100’s alien land law map and the March 4 webinar were featured by Chinese in US in this piece.
Committee of 100’s update to the alien land laws map and data was spotlighted in this AsAmNews article.
Fair Housing Rights & Alien Land Laws: Challenges and Advocacy for the Asian American Community. RSVP here.
Committee of 100’s data on alien land laws spotlighted in this VOA News article on foreign farm ownership.
Committee of 100 Interim President Cindy Tsai quoted on recent alien land law push in Texas in this Yahoo News! / Next Shark feature story.
From Past Prejudice to Present Policy: The Impact of Land Ownership Exclusion Laws on Diverse Communities. Watch the replay here.
FAQ
The term “alien land laws” started in the mid-19th and early 20th centuries with the Western states in the U.S. attempting to limit the presence and permanence of Chinese and Japanese immigrants by forbidding “aliens ineligible for citizenship” from purchasing, and later from leasing property in the states in which these laws were passed. For example, In Oregon’s 1859 constitution, it stated that no “Chinaman” could own property in the state, and it protected specifically the rights of “white foreigners” the same property owning rights as enjoyed by native citizens.
On April 29, 1878, the Ninth Circuit Court in California denied Ah Yup the right to naturalize. The court did this by citing the 1802 naturalization laws and all revised statutes that had been passed since. At the time of Ah Yup’s petition, the laws granted all “free white persons” as well as all “aliens of African nativity, and persons of African descent” the right to naturalize. This led to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which explicitly excluded Chinese immigrants from citizenship.
As U.S.-China relations have deteriorated, fears about Chinese influence and espionage have increased. Alien land laws are often framed as a way to limit foreign control of strategic assets, such as farmland, real estate near military bases, or critical infrastructure. Politicians have justified these laws by citing concerns about national security, particularly regarding potential surveillance or foreign ownership of resources critical to food and energy supplies.
Lastly, the increasing racism and xenophobia that has targeted Chinese and Asian Americans in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to increasing treatment of Asian citizens and immigrants as perpetual foreigners.
Alien laws have often reflected societal fears or biases. For example, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 in the U.S. barred Chinese immigrants under the guise of protecting jobs, but it was largely rooted in racial prejudice. Policies today must be critically examined to ensure they address genuine national interests without being discriminatory. Transparent justification and public accountability are essential to avoid perpetuating exclusionary practices. Language in policies and public discourse matters. Framing immigration and alien laws in inclusive terms can prevent xenophobia and build public trust in the system.
Many alien laws have shifted based on economic need. For instance, during labor shortages in wartime, the U.S. instituted the Bracero Program (1942-1964) to bring in Mexican workers, even while other restrictive laws were still in place. As global economies evolve, immigration laws should be flexible enough to adapt to workforce demands while protecting worker rights—both for citizens and immigrants.
Ordinary citizens play a crucial role in preventing the rise of restrictive alien land laws, which historically have been used to limit land ownership or rights for immigrants and non-citizens. Some recommendations include the following:
Educate Yourself and Others: learn about the history of alien land laws which targeted Japanese and Chinese immigrants, preventing them from owning land and building generational wealth. Through this education, share this knowledge with others through conversations, social media, or community events to highlight how such laws have historically perpetuated inequality and racial discrimination.
Advocate for Fair Legislation: contact your local, state, and federal representatives to express opposition to discriminatory laws and advocate for policies that promote equal rights for all residents, regardless of citizenship or immigration status.
Build Coalitions: partner with organizations like APA Justice, Committee of 100 and others that work with immigrants and non-citizens to amplify their voices and protect their rights. Work with advocacy groups, faith organizations, and civil rights coalitions to create a broad-based movement opposing discriminatory laws.
Challenge Discriminatory Narratives: alien land laws are often rooted in xenophobic or protectionist rhetoric that portrays immigrants as threats to national security or the economy. Challenge these myths by sharing facts and emphasizing the contributions of immigrants to society.
Vote and Participate in Local Politics: vote for candidates who advocate for immigrant rights and oppose discriminatory legislation. Attend city council or state legislature meetings to voice concerns about alien land laws and ensure immigrant voices are included in policymaking.
If these alien land laws restrict foreign ownership or investment, some industries may be forced to scale back, resulting in fewer jobs and less economic activity in local markets. This could be particularly challenging for rural or economically underdeveloped regions that rely on foreign investment for growth and infrastructure. Over time, this could stifle local economies, reducing opportunities for entrepreneurship and limiting access to capital for small businesses.
Some of these laws also restrict the ability of immigrants to buy homes and gain an economic foothold in the United States.
These laws also create a sense of exclusion for immigrant communities, particularly Chinese Americans and other Asian groups, who may be disproportionately targeted by the perception that they are responsible for “outsider” investment in local property markets. The rhetoric around these laws often includes stereotypes that associate certain ethnic groups with negative economic effects, creating divisions and reinforcing prejudices and xenophobia.
Similar Works

