China Temporarily Bans Certain Foreigners From Entry
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.27.20
On March 26, 2020, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China (“MFA”) announced a decision to temporarily suspend entry into China by foreign nationals holding valid visas or residence permits (including APEC Business Travel Cards) as a preventative measure against the COVID-19 pandemic starting from midnight, March 28, 2020.
The announcement lists the specific categories of visas affected (above). However, those who enter with the visas listed below will not be affected:
- Diplomatic, service, courtesy or C visas.
- Entry with new visas, specifically those issued after this announcement.
Meanwhile, the MFA has confirmed that foreign nationals affected may apply for new visas at Chinese embassies or consulates for necessary economic, trade, scientific or technological activities or based on emergency humanitarian need.
The announcement does not indicate the expiration date of the suspension. According to the MFA, the suspension is a temporary measure that China is compelled to take considering the pandemic and the varied practices of other countries. The measures will be calibrated in view of the evolving situation and revised or updated accordingly.
Because some employees with valid work permits may not be able to enter China from March 28 due to the suspension, employers will need to prepare to make alternative work arrangements for expat workers who may be trying to return to China.
For the text of the official announcement from MFA, please go to:
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
