On the 11th Anniversary of China’s “709 Crackdown”

New York City Bar Association Statement

Today marks the eleventh anniversary of the “709 Crackdown,” a coordinated campaign launched by the authorities of the People’s Republic of China on July 9, 2015, in which hundreds of human rights lawyers, legal assistants, and civil society advocates were detained, interrogated, disbarred, or forcibly disappeared. On this solemn occasion, the New York City Bar Association reaffirms its commitment to the principles of lawyer independence and the rule of law and condemns the ongoing persecution of members of the legal profession in China.

The systematic targeting of lawyers who represent politically disfavored clients or who advocate for fundamental rights strikes at the very foundation of any legal system worthy of the name. When lawyers cannot practice free from state intimidation – when they face imprisonment, torture, surveillance, and the revocation of their licenses for fulfilling their professional duties –the rule of law is rendered hollow, not only within the jurisdiction that perpetrates such abuses, but globally.[1]

The “709 Crackdown” was not an isolated episode; in the eleven years since, many of the lawyers swept up in that campaign remain subject to continuing restrictions, enforced silence, or exile. This year alone:

1. On March 23, 2026, lawyer Xie Yang was sentenced to five years in prison and fined 100,000 yuan (~$14,500 USD) after a closed-door trial without a defense attorney that followed four years of pre-trial detention on the crime of “inciting subversion of state power.”[2] Xie had previously disclosed being beaten in detention.

2. On April 13, 2026, lawyer Yu Wensheng was released from Zhenjiang Prison after completing a three-year prison sentence. He was convicted and detained based on unfounded charges of “inciting subversion of state power.” He and his family remain under surveillance by authorities and were recently prevented from leaving the country.[3]

This year saw a brand new wave of assaults on lawyers in connection with a crackdown on the prominent underground Zion Church, evidencing a broader deterioration in lawyers’ right to independent legal practice in the PRC. Lawyers representing members of the Zion Church have been targeted and prevented from continuing their representation of Church members:

1. Following a January 2026 hearing, lawyer Zhang Kai had his law license revoked based on his representation of the lead pastor for the Zion Church.[4]

2. In March of 2026, six lawyers for members of the Zion Church had their law licenses suspended;[5]

3. In July of 2026, lawyer Zhang Lei was blocked from accessing clients affiliated with the Zion Church.[6]

In addition to these individuals, on June 26, 2026, the PRC published a series of proposed revisions to China’s Lawyers Law that requires lawyers to “uphold the leadership of the Communist Party of China” and its “socialist rule of law,” and further requires law firms to “establish CCP organizations under the Party constitution.”[7]

These facts demand the sustained attention of the international legal community. Despite the mounting pressures of this latest crackdown, lawyers surveyed by advocates underscored the need to continue their work and called upon the international community to “Let people know that there was once a group of legal professionals who fought to protect their clients’ rights, only to be ruthlessly suppressed by authorities under the guise of law. Let them see the grim reality of a legal community being steadily weakened – but also see that some legal professionals are still pressing forward through the thorns.”[8]

The New York City Bar’s statement today reaffirms each and every one of the City Bar’s prior public statements issued on the anniversary of the “709 Crackdown.” The City Bar continues to condemn the PRC’s campaign against lawyers and calls for the restoration of the rights of all those affected; and urges bar associations, legal organizations, and governments around the world to speak clearly: the independence of the legal profession is not a parochial concern but a universal prerequisite of justice, and those who would suppress it must be held to account.