On November 21, 2025, CSCC had the pleasure of welcoming Professor Matthew Erie, Associate Professor of Chinese Studies at Oxford University and Penn Alumni, to discuss his and his team’s research on the role of emotion in U.S.-China comparative law projects.
In his presentation, Erie and his team aim to answer how comparative law projects are shaping legal and regulatory reform in both jurisdictions and what implications they hold for international legal ordering. Amid geopolitical tensions, Erie highlights how emotions serve as strategic assets in comparative law, influencing cross-border legal frameworks. Concepts like "structures of feeling" reveal the interplay of lived values and tensions, while "adversarial comparativism" shows how emotion-driven projects use lawfare to counter rivals rather than emulate them. Understanding how emotions like indignation and fear shape these dynamics is crucial.
Erie remarks that U.S. federal and state laws are similarly imbued with emotion. Particularly in the property sector, there is increasing legislative activity aimed at countering the “China Threat.” In recent years, there have been 152 bills pertaining to property, targeting land, business transactions, and even personal property. While some argue that these laws are not necessarily constructed emotionally, Erie notes that several lawmakers have been quoted as saying things such as “if they could just live like civilized human beings,” in response to backlash against their legislation. Naturally, Chinese citizens in the U.S. have reacted negatively to comments like these, some even saying it feels like “they want to kill us.” Florida Senate Bill 264 (SB264), enacted in May 2023, exemplifies this trend. The law restricts property ownership for individuals from “foreign countries of concern,” prohibiting them from owning or acquiring certain real estate in the state. Erie notes that this form of sub-national diplomacy and lawfare—law used as a weapon of war—is becoming increasingly prevalent in the U.S. However, many of these laws are inconsistent and include ambiguous language. For instance, property laws don’t specifically clarify whether “controlling interest” includes leaseholds, leaving landlords and tenants confused. On the other side, emotions in China have inspired lawmakers to adopt U.S.-style lawfare.
Erie argues that this arises from both indignation toward the U.S. for attempting to thwart China and admiration for the U.S. as a superpower. Starting with the U.S.-China trade war during the Trump administration, there has been increasing extraterritorial legislative activity in China. Erie observes that this is not coincidental; Chinese officials are recognizing the effects principle from U.S. case law and mirroring it in their own policies. Erie and his team’s research makes it clear that lawmakers in both China and the U.S. are increasingly being swayed by emotion rather than logic. As the United States enters a second Trump administration, this issue is likely to become more prevalent. President Trump has promised to increase tariffs on Chinese goods even higher this time around, and it is likely that his administration will use many other means to try and combat Chinese competition. While that may be true, there is no way to say how the CCP will respond to this administration. Only time will tell.