Bridging the Gap: The Role of Asian American Public Interest Organizations in the Pursuit of Legal and Social Remedies to Anti-Asian Hate Crimes

Abstract

The April 1997 shooting death of Kuanchung Kao by Rohnert Park police in Sonoma County, California galvanized the Asian American community in the Bay Area. Rohnert Park police argued that Kao's shooting was justified on the grounds that he posed a "martial arts" threat to the officer.' Michael Lynch, one of the two officers at the scene, described Kao as a "ninja fighter."2 In response to the killing, the Asian Law Caucus became involved in the Kao case to pursue legal and social remedies to hate crimes and hate violence. The Asian Law Caucus played a pivotal role in organizing community involvement to seek a legal remedy to Kao's death through the formation of the Justice for the Kao Family Coalition. A strong community-based response was critical to the Asian Law Caucus in order to "bolster" the potential for a legal remedy in the Kao case. This Essay argues that Asian American public interest organizations are simultaneously marginal and central to mainstream American legal frameworks. They occupy an "interstice" between formalized legal frameworks and the methods and functions of community-based public advocacy. The term "interstice" describes the proactive political practices and the role of Asian American public interest organizations as intermediaries between their locally based ethnic community interests and official government legal frameworks and institutions. It represents a "political space" where public advocacy in what is normally considered the "margins" of law, is brought to bear on the "center" or mainstream of law.