WORLD NEWS: Missouri’s Radical Action Against China Sends Shockwaves

Missouri is seizing $24 billion in Chinese-owned farmland as retribution for the pandemic deceit, setting a precedent that may transform U.S. policy on foreign land ownership while heightening tensions with China.

Key Takeaways

• A Missouri federal judge awarded the state $24 billion in damages after ruling that China deliberately misled the world about the pandemic’s dangers and hoarded protective equipment
• Missouri plans to seize Chinese-owned farmland and other assets to satisfy the judgment, with Attorney General Andrew Bailey already initiating the asset identification process
• The landmark ruling raises significant national security concerns about Chinese ownership of approximately 384,000 acres of U.S. farmland, particularly near military installations
• China has rejected the ruling as having “no basis in fact, law or international precedence” and threatened reciprocal countermeasures against American interests
• The case may bolster President Trump’s efforts to ban Chinese nationals from purchasing U.S. farmland and strengthen state-level restrictions on foreign land ownership

Historic Judgment Against China for the Pandemic Deception

Missouri has secured a groundbreaking $24 billion judgment against the Chinese government and related entities for their role in concealing the early dangers of the pandemic and deliberately hoarding personal protective equipment (PPE). U.S. District Court Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh Jr. ruled in favor of Missouri in a default judgment after Chinese officials refused to appear in court to defend themselves against the allegations. The ruling represents the first successful state-level lawsuit against China for its handling of the pandemic outbreak and could establish a precedent for other states seeking similar compensation.

“China was misleading the world about the dangers and scope of the pandemic,” stated U.S. District Court Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh Jr. in his ruling that found China liable for substantial damages.

The lawsuit, initially filed in 2020, accused the Chinese Communist Party, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and other Chinese entities of causing and exacerbating the pandemic through deception and resource hoarding. Missouri claimed it spent over $122 million more on PPE than it would have otherwise and lost more than $8 billion in tax revenue due to China’s actions. The lawsuit was pursued under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which permits lawsuits against foreign governments under specific circumstances and allows for the seizure of foreign assets to satisfy judgments.

Missouri’s Plan to Seize Chinese-Owned Farmland

Following the landmark judgment, Missouri has announced plans to immediately begin identifying Chinese-owned assets within the state that can be seized to satisfy the $24 billion award. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has taken a decisive approach to enforcing the judgment, already initiating legal proceedings to secure court orders for asset seizure. While the exact amount of Chinese-owned farmland in Missouri remains unclear, the state appears determined to target these properties as a primary means of collecting the damages awarded by the court.

“Missouri will start to identify and begin going to court to have court orders issued to seize those assets to make good on that judgment,” declared Attorney General Andrew Bailey, demonstrating the state’s commitment to enforcing the unprecedented ruling.

The seizure strategy has sparked intense debate about the implications for property rights, international relations, and the legal mechanisms for enforcing judgments against sovereign entities. Missouri’s approach may also serve as a template for other states considering similar actions against foreign governments. Reports suggest that Missouri may collaborate with the Trump administration to identify and seize Chinese-owned assets across the state, potentially extending the enforcement strategy to other jurisdictions with Chinese investments.

See more

More of this, please. Other states should follow Missouri’s lead, claim massive damages from China—which are totally justified—and use the claim to recover Chinese assets like farmland. It’s a scandal Beijing was ever allowed to own farmland in the US in the first place. https://t.co/CnKOgJr6Cv

— RAW EGG NATIONALIST (@Babygravy9) March 24, 2025

Foreign Land Ownership and National Security Implications

The Missouri judgment has thrust the issue of foreign land ownership in America into the national spotlight, particularly concerning Chinese acquisitions near sensitive military installations. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, foreign entities owned approximately 40.8 million acres of American farmland as of 2021, with Chinese interests controlling about 384,000 acres. However, experts suggest that USDA data may not capture all Chinese acquisitions, especially those made through shell companies or intermediaries near military bases. This underreporting has heightened concerns about potential intelligence gathering and security threats posed by strategic land purchases.

“China’s campaign to hoard the global supply of PPE was performed in conjunction with its repeated misrepresentations on the existence, and then scope and human-to-human transmissibility of, the pandemic virus,” wrote Missouri District Judge Stephen Limbaugh, Jr. in his ruling, highlighting the coordinated nature of China’s deceptive practices during the pandemic.

The Missouri case has reinvigorated discussions about strengthening restrictions on foreign land ownership across the United States. Multiple states are considering legislation to ban or severely limit foreign ownership of agricultural land, with particular focus on properties near military installations. The Treasury Department has recently proposed rules to block Chinese corporations from owning land near U.S. military bases, reflecting growing bipartisan concern about the national security implications of foreign land ownership. President Trump, during his successful 2024 campaign, proposed a comprehensive ban on Chinese nationals purchasing American farmland.

Diplomatic Fallout and International Repercussions

China has forcefully rejected the Missouri judgment, with Chinese embassy spokesman Liu Pengyu dismissing it as baseless and threatening retaliatory measures against American interests. The diplomatic standoff highlights the complex intersection of legal, economic, and geopolitical considerations involved in holding foreign powers accountable for pandemic-related harms. The case has also raised questions about the enforceability of such judgments and potential international ramifications, including the possibility of escalating trade tensions and reciprocal legal actions against U.S. assets abroad.

“The so-called lawsuit has no basis in fact, law or international precedent,” stated Chinese embassy spokesman Liu Pengyu, rejecting the validity of the Missouri judgment and signaling a confrontational diplomatic response from Beijing.

The Missouri lawsuit has broader implications for U.S.-China relations and global pandemic preparedness. It has reinvigorated discussions about supply chain vulnerabilities exposed during the pandemic crisis, particularly America’s reliance on China for critical medical supplies. The judgment may accelerate efforts to reshore manufacturing of essential medical equipment and reduce dependency on foreign suppliers. As Missouri proceeds with its enforcement actions, the international community is closely watching how this unprecedented legal challenge to China’s pandemic conduct unfolds and whether it establishes new norms for holding nations accountable for public health failures with global consequences.