Texas Ban on Chinese Citizens Buying Land Contested in Court (1)

A Texas law barring Chinese citizens from buying property in the state is discriminatory and unconstitutional, a group of challengers allege in a federal lawsuit.

The state law (SB 17), set to take effect Sept. 1, restricts real estate purchases by individuals, companies, and government entities linked to nations that the federal government or Texas governor designate as a threat to the US. The measure identifies China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia, but leaves open the future addition of other countries to the list.

Three Chinese citizens who live in Texas sued Attorney General Ken Paxton, seeking class status and asking the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas to declare the law invalid and block its enforcement. They claim the law violates the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause and is preempted by the federal Fair Housing Act.

Texas is one of more than a dozen states to enact laws restricting farm land and other real estate purchases by citizens or residents of foreign countries that lawmakers deem threats to US national security.

Litigation challenging Florida’s law is pending appeal at the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. A three-judge panel there temporarily blocked enforcement against two plaintiffs, after a lower court denied a broader injunction. A federal judge in Arkansas granted a preliminary injunction blocking a similar law in December.

The laws are designed to “fearmonger and raise racist and xenophobic tensions” among voters, particularly in southern states, similar to an earlier generation’s Alien Land Laws that many states repealed a century ago, said Justin Sadowsky of the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance, who’s representing the plaintiffs.

“This isn’t about national security,” he said. “It’s about appearing tough and appearing mean to immigrants.”

The Texas attorney general’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The case is Wang v. Paxton, S.D. Tex., No. 4:25-cv-03103, complaint 7/3/25