Asian Americans and Affirmative Action: A Case Study for Inter-Minority Group Relations and Policy

Abstract

In 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States effectively ended race-based affirmative action in college admissions with their decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. Asian Americans were featured prominently in the case and broader discourse, even though a majority (69%) of Asian Americans support such policies. Here, a socio-historical approach helps to understand how Asian Americans have been positioned against affirmative action according to Racial Triangulation Theory and stereotypes rooted in the model minority myth. Two areas of research and theory (privilege and inter-minority group relations) suggest social psychologically informed policy recommendations and areas of advocacy. Ultimately, racial justice and equity can be achieved through an inter-minority group coalition built on an understanding of history, development of critical race consciousness, and informed community engagement.

Keywords

Asian Americans affirmative action racial triangulation theory prejudice inter-minority group relations

Social Media

The SCOTUS's 2023 ruling ended affirmative action, spotlighting Asian Americans, despite most supporting the policy. History and research on stereotypes, privilege, and group relations help to understand Asian Americans and affirmative action, calling for inter-minority coalition building.

Key Points

The Supreme Court's Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023) ruling ended race-based affirmative action, with Asian Americans strategically positioned as opponents despite most supporting such policies (69%).

Asian Americans have been used and represented in affirmative action cases, with a focus on the model minority myth.

Asian Americans’ racial position according to Racial Triangulation Theory (Kim, 1999) and its update place Asian Americans as “not-White” but also “not-Black”.

Based on theory and research about privilege and inter-minority group relations, Asian Americans’ position can lead to zero-sum competition, hinder inter-minority solidarity, and limit understandings of structural inequities.

Policies should consider the development of Asian Americans’ critical race consciousness, awareness of shared yet different oppression, and the building of interracial minority group coalitions to advance racial justice in the post-affirmative action era.

The landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) v. Harvard (2023) effectively brought an end to race-based affirmative action in college admissions. While the SFFA ostensibly represented Asian Americans, the organization itself was not founded by Asian Americans. Indeed, for these cases, not a single Asian American plaintiff was identified or spoke during lower court proceedings (Poon, 2024). The SFFA was created and funded by Edward Blum, an opponent of affirmative action (Hinger, 2018). Blum had previously supported a White plaintiff's challenge against affirmative action (Fisher v. University of Texas, 2013) and when that failed stated that he “needed Asian plaintiffs” (Hinger, 2018, para. 6). Blum's positioning of Asian Americans against affirmative action is at odds with data from a nationally representative survey showing that 69% of Asian Americans support affirmative action (Asian American Voter Survey; AAVS, 2022), which has remained relatively consistent (Teranishi, 2017). This misrepresentation of Asian Americans’ position regarding affirmative action (Alt & Goh, 2024) represents a unique case study to explore interracial group relations with policy implications.

The present article draws on history, Racial Triangulation Theory (Kim, 1999), and inter-minority group research to explain how Asian Americans came to be positioned as a foil against affirmative action and its implications for policy. A historical and social psychological approach illuminates how Asian Americans’ racial position in the United States as not-White, but also not-Black, ultimately works to preserve a racial hierarchy that places Whites at the top (Kim, 2023). This paper begins by recounting how Asian Americans have been positioned for and against affirmative action. This context (Trawalter et al., 2022) addresses intergroup relations within the U.S. among Whites and racial minorities and Asian Americans’ racial position and stereotypes. Two areas of research (Privilege and Interracial Coalitions) suggest public policy recommendations to build better inter-minority group relations, which can work to affirm the principles and values of affirmative action policies.

A Brief History of Asian Americans & Affirmative Action

Affirmative action originated when President Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order 11246 requiring contractors to “take affirmative action” to ensure fair employment practices regardless of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin (Executive Order No. 11246, 1965). Originally, affirmative action was a justice-based policy, designed to address the legacy and harms of slavery, segregation, and economic exclusion against Black Americans. Asian Americans played a small but significant role in developing the basis for affirmative action policies, such as the use of proportionality logic to determine discrimination (Wu, 2022). While such policies expanded to universities, this intent of affirmative action diminished in court challenges such as Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978). In that case, Justice Powell, writing the controlling opinion, rejected the reparative or race-specific justifications for affirmative action, arguing that the courts should not be in the position to weigh the various histories of discrimination experienced by different minority groups. Following this rationale, Powell revised affirmative action to move away from racial justice to focus on creating diversity within institutions (Poon, 2024). Critically, and foreshadowing SFFA v. Harvard University, Powell's decision employed the narrative that Asian Americans were a minority group that did not require redress due to their academic success without policy intervention, laying the groundwork for the belief that Asian Americans are hurt by affirmative action (Regents v. Bakke, 1978).

The attacks on affirmative action continued, sometimes leading to its outright ban (e.g., California's 1996 Proposition 209), with an increasing focus on notions of merit and fairness as well as charges of reverse discrimination. For instance, in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), White Michigan residents challenged affirmative action as unfair and discriminatory toward Whites. The point of contention in Gratz v. Bollinger was the University of Michigan's admission policy that awarded 20 points to “underrepresented minorities”, which included African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans (but not Asian Americans). The SCOTUS ruled that the University of Michigan violated the Equal Protection Clause with Justice Rehnquist, arguing that the University of Michigan's method of promoting diversity was not sufficiently narrowly tailored to survive strict scrutiny (a criterion established in Regents v. Bakke, 1978) to achieve the university's goal of diversity. In Grutter v. Bollinger, while the university admitted to considering race during admissions procedures, a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice O'Connor held that the university's narrowly tailored use of race to promote a diverse student body and gain educational benefits did not violate the Equal Protections Clause.

The charge of reverse discrimination became more explicit in Fisher v. University of Texas (2013). Additionally, although the plaintiff, Abigail Fisher, was White, the case built on a growing conservative narrative that race-conscious policies unfairly benefited Black and Latinx applicants at the expense of White and Asian Americans. These arguments gained traction because they allowed critics of affirmative action to mask White grievance under the facade of racial fairness (Poon, 2024). Justice Thomas's concurrent opinion further reinforced this logic, denying any constitutional or moral necessity for racial diversity and rejecting the foundational premise of affirmative action as a tool for redress (Fisher v. University of Texas, 2013).

In SFFA v. Harvard (2023), the case that ultimately ended affirmative action, Edward Blum cast high-achieving Asian American students as victims of discriminatory admissions practices. By positioning Asian Americans as the “face” against affirmative action, Blum effectively weaponized the model minority myth, a set of beliefs and stereotypes that coalesce around the idea that Asian Americans perform well academically due to their values and hard work (Kim, 1999), to challenge the legitimacy of race-conscious admissions. Additionally, by using Asian Americans, advocates argued that affirmative action penalized not just Whites but another racial minority at the expense of diversity. The SFFA represented a culmination of a decades-long strategy to erode the reparative aims of affirmative action and ultimately end such policies.

Beyond the dismantling of affirmative action, these efforts influenced people's perceptions of Asian Americans’ support for affirmative action, and also Asian Americans’ own support for affirmative action. For example, Alt and Goh (2024) found that White Americans, Black Americans, and even Asian Americans significantly underestimated Asian Americans’ support for affirmative action (estimated at 54% on average) in comparison to the polling showing 69% (AAVS, 2022). In addition, Asian Americans’ support for affirmative action shifted depending on whether they were told other Asian Americans supported or opposed affirmative action; thus their opinions could be swayed by misperceptions about their in-group's attitude. This in-group norms effect is particularly potent given the recent rise of more insular chat groups on platforms such as WeChat, which allows for the spread of misinformation regarding how affirmative action works and its consequences, particularly among Chinese immigrant communities (Zhang, 2018).

Asian Americans’ Racial Position in the United States

The history of affirmative action and how Asian Americans have both positioned themselves but also have been used for and against court challenges, provides a unique case study to examine Asian Americans’ broader social position within the US racial hierarchy. Critical to this understanding is Claire Jean Kim's Racial Triangulation Theory (Kim, 1999). This theory arose to move beyond Black and White racial discourse and highlights how Asian Americans inform the U.S. racial hierarchy. Kim argues that Asian Americans have been triangulated between Whites and Blacks through two processes: relative valorization and civic ostracism. In terms of relative valorization, Asian Americans are often championed by Whites as a racial minority that achieved success through self-reliance and discipline, despite facing discrimination. The model minority myth (Lee et al., 2009) exemplifies this idea. According to its logic, Asian Americans were framed as a “solution” to the so-called problem of race in America (Au, 2024) by elevating Asian Americans above other racial minorities but, in particular Black Americans to undermine claims to systemic injustice and to maintain existing racial hierarchies. This myth's continued impact can be seen in the SFFA v. Harvard, where affirmative action policies were described as disadvantageous to the “deserving” minorities (Kim, 2018). Indeed, anti-Black and anti-affirmative action beliefs are predicted by Asian Americans’ internalization of the model minority myth (Yi & Todd, 2021). Thus, the model minority myth and relative valorization work to dismantle intra-minority solidarity necessary for racial justice.

The second process, civic ostracism, is key in maintaining Whites’ dominance. While Asian Americans are held up as a model minority, they are also viewed as perpetual foreigners, unable to be seen as American, a status reserved for Whites (see Devos & Banaji, 2005; Zou & Cheryan, 2017). The effects of this belief can be seen in historical court cases which denied Asian Americans citizenship on the grounds that they were not White (see Takao Ozawa v. United States (1922) and United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923)) and continues today with attacks on Asian Americans’ political participation frequently linked to being stereotypically threatening, foreign agents or spies (see Fitzsimmons & Rubinstein, 2025) and the microaggressions such as questioning of where Asian Americans are really from (Cheryan & Monin, 2005; Sue et al., 2007).

In an update to the Racial Triangulation Theory, Kim (2023) argued that Asian Americans occupy a position as both not-White but also not-Black. That is, historically and continuing today, Asian Americans have sought to differentiate themselves from Black Americans in order to gain privileges associated with Whiteness. For example, in Ozawa v. United States (1922) and United States v. Thind (1923), the Asian American plaintiffs argued that they should be granted citizenship because they were part of the “Caucasian” race. In another case on education, Gong Lum v. Rice (1927), Katherine and Jeu Gon Lum argued that their children should be able to attend White and not Black schools. While all three challenges were dismissed, each of them relied on a logic that Asian Americans gain the status and favor of the dominant racial group, White Americans, and avoid identification with the subordinate group, Black Americans. This contrasts with other court cases where Asian Americans’ legal challenges led to equity gains for all racial groups. For example, United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) helped to establish the parameters of birthright citizenship and Lau v. Nicholas (1974) led to bilingual education in public schools (Poon, 2024).

These frameworks and theories, when applied to affirmative action, show how Asian Americans, both willingly and unwillingly, are positioned to affirm Whiteness and distance themselves from Blackness. They also interconnect with social psychological research and theory on inter-minority group relations. The next section outlines two consequences of this positioning of Asian Americans in relation to affirmative action and how psychological research can inform issues and policy.

Asian American “Privilege”

Asian Americans’ positioning within the Racial Triangulation Theory (Kim, 1999) results in a tenuous middle ground whereby they are perceived to be superior to Black Americans yet inferior to White Americans. Thus, while Asian Americans can never fully access the social status and institutional advantages afforded to White Americans, they still benefit from the privilege of being viewed as “not-Black” (Kim, 2023). While some argue that claiming “Asian privilege” goes too far (Oh & Eguchi, 2022), it is the case that across a number of socio-economic metrics Asian Americans fare better than other racial minority groups (e.g., median salary/income, education attainment, of course dependent on which ethnic group is being examined, Johnson & Betsinger, 2009; Lee & Zhou, 2015). As noted above, Asian Americans are also stereotyped through the lens of the model minority myth which aligns with definitions of privilege whereby some “unearned advantage [is] derived from one's group membership” (Phillips & Lowery, 2018, p. 156).

Social psychological research can reveal insights into how privilege operates and affects one's psychology. White Americans frequently deny or dismiss their privilege (Knowles et al., 2014; Phillips & Lowery, 2018), even to the point of perceiving growing reverse racial discrimination (Norton & Sommers, 2011). This is coupled with White Americans who perceive greater discrimination against their own group also endorsing more zero-sum beliefs (Wilkins et al., 2015). Additionally, when faced with their privilege, White Americans claim greater disadvantage in an attempt to alleviate concerns around unearned privilege (Phillips & Lowery, 2015). While no research to our knowledge has examined similar processes with Asian Americans, research does suggest that Asian Americans are perceived to align themselves with White interests more than with other racial minorities’ interests (Craig & Lee, 2022; Craig et al., 2022). Thus, Asian Americans may have similar reactions to privilege, especially when college admissions is viewed in terms of zero-sum competition.

For Asian Americans, this may be an even more insidious process because as a U.S. racial minority, there are real discrepancies between Asians and Whites; thus to claim racial discrimination is not false (Kawai, 2005; Varma, 2004). Where this logic becomes suspect is when Asian Americans attempt to justify the dismantling of affirmative action policies by claiming that Asian Americans’ experience of racial discrimination should be equated to Black Americans’ experience, leading to questions of why “advantages” are provided to one racial minority group over another (Poon, 2024). This trap of equivalences pits the two racial minority groups against each other, with the consequence of increasing perceptions of zero-sum competition. Indeed, Asian and Black Americans view their groups as losing out to the other in terms of college admissions and jobs; and this predicts, for Asian Americans, less similarity with and support for Black Americans (Goh & Douglas, 2025). This competition can lead to beliefs that Asian Americans are better than other groups, reflected in an internalization of the model minority myth which also predicts opposition to affirmative action (Wang & Santos, 2023; Yi & Todd, 2021).

Policy Consequences and Recommendations

In terms of policy recommendations, the counter to privilege denial is privilege acknowledgment. For Asian Americans, however, their racial minority status in the U.S. presents unique challenges as well as opportunities regarding this process. A wholesale denial that Asian Americans have experienced racial discrimination is incorrect, as historical (e.g., Japanese internment, murder of Vincent Chin) and contemporary (e.g., anti-Asian sentiment regarding COVID) examples abound. Yet, the trap of equivalences, as noted, presents a barrier for Asian Americans to acknowledge privilege. Within affirmative action discourse, this often comes up as a belief that because Asian Americans experience discrimination they should be included in affirmative action policies or that such policies should not exist because their group has “overcome” discrimination (Poon, 2024).

One solution to this issue is building critical consciousness, or the ability to recognize, analyze, and challenge systems of oppression (Freire, 1970; Heberle et al., 2020). For Asian Americans, their experiences of racial discrimination and racial socialization could serve as foundations for understanding other racial minorities’ experiences, with attention paid to how Asian Americans both fight against and contribute to racism. Indeed, in interviews with Asian American supporters of affirmative action, an underlying theme was a sense of commonality with other racial minorities and a belief that fighting against racism uplifts all racial minority groups (Poon, 2024). Empirical studies support this idea as serial mediation analyses suggest that Asian Americans’ experiences with discrimination are related to activism through structural awareness and collective identity, as well as the rejection of the model minority myth (Tran & Curtin, 2017). Asian Americans’ experiences with discrimination predict not only collective action for Asian Americans but also collective action described as helping all People of Color (Ouch & Moradi, 2022).

Overall, policies and educational programs can highlight how racism is a unique experience but also how it operates similarly as a method of oppression. This approach would fit with research on conceptualizing prejudice as generalized (Sanchez et al., 2018) and intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991). To this end, one effective strategy is supporting ethnic studies courses, which are linked to better school achievement and critical consciousness development (Case, 2007; Pinedo et al., 2025); this would be a way to use history to illuminate instances of intergroup cooperation (e.g., bilingual education expansion in Lau v. Nicholas (1974)). Engagement with diversity-related activities has also been linked to more favorable attitudes toward affirmative action (Aberson, 2007). Ultimately, by developing critical race consciousness, Asian Americans can begin to acknowledge their racial position and work against positioning themselves as “not-Black” (Kim, 2023) in order to build interracial minority coalitions and alliances.

Coalition Building & Inter-Minority Group Relations

Affirmative action is often viewed as a divisive issue between Asian Americans and other racial minority groups, particularly Black Americans (Goh & Douglas, 2025; Kim, 2018; Lee & Tran, 2019). Yet, as noted above, polling suggests that the majority of Asian Americans support affirmative action (AAVS, 2022) and, more generally, hold slightly favorable attitudes toward Black Americans (Huang, 2021; Nicholson et al., 2025). A burgeoning area of social psychology research on inter-minority group relations (Cortland et al., 2017; Craig & Richeson, 2012, 2016) can help illuminate Asian Americans’ support and opposition for other racial minority groups. On the one hand, perceived solidarity and similarity between Asian Americans and Black Americans is one path to building interracial coalitions. On the other hand, beliefs about zero-sum competition can hinder coalition building. This last section turns to the opportunities and barriers for inter-minority group coalitions and relations.

Early work on inter-minority group relations showed that Asian Americans, when primed with racial discrimination against their group, reported more positive attitudes toward and greater perceived similarity with Black Americans (Craig & Richeson, 2012). This notion of similarity fits with the common in-group identity model (Gaertner et al., 1993), which suggests that activating a superordinate identity, such as racial minority, may lead to cooperation and cross-race coalitions. While a nascent area, research on Asian and Black Americans suggests that highlighting racial discrimination experiences (Kraus & Vinluan, 2023; Ouch & Moradi, 2022) and in the workplace (Jun et al., 2023) leads to greater perceived similarity and allyship behaviors. Additionally, the extent to which Asian Americans believed others included them under the umbrella of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC), predicted their activism in support of the Black community (Lieng et al., 2024). This perceived similarity can also be enhanced by describing stereotyping and bias along similar dimensions such as Asian Americans and Black Americans being perceived as foreign (Zou & Ngum, 2025). This evidence supports developing critical race consciousness (see above), as learning about Asian American discrimination creates greater understanding, empathy, and support for other racial minorities.

Unfortunately, other examples highlight barriers to creating inter-minority group coalitions. As detailed by Kim (2023), Asian and Black Americans have often had fraught relationships, from the killing of Latasha Harlins by a Korean store owner to media coverage of anti-Asian violence during the COVID pandemic highlighting Black perpetrators (even though most anti-Asian violence is committed not by Black Americans, Zhang et al., 2022). This ties into psychological theorizing on Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), which predicts that when threatened, group members may turn inward and increase group competition to maintain positive regard. As noted previously, beliefs that Asian Americans are losing to Black Americans predicts lower support for and less similarity with Black people (Goh & Douglas, 2025; also see Nicholson et al., 2025). System justification beliefs—that is, the belief that the racial hierarchy is fair and just (Jost et al., 2004)—also present a barrier to inter-minority group coalitions: Asian Americans who score high on system justification express less support for the Black Lives Matter movement (Pérez et al., 2025). Additionally, perceived allyship between Black and Asian Americans is low (Krogstad & Cox, 2023), as is willingness for intergroup contact (Meyers et al., 2024). This all suggests that while positive inter-minority group relationships and coalitions are possible, attention must be paid to skillfully building such coalitions.

Policy Consequences and Recommendations

In order to counter these possible barriers to inter-minority group relations, it is useful to recognize and highlight the beneficiary of a narrative that pits Asian and Black Americans against each other. Namely, White supremacy. Evidence suggests that White Americans are threatened by the increasing racial diversity in the United States (Craig & Richeson, 2014; Danbold & Huo, 2015) and one counter to this threat is to suppress multiracial coalitions that could challenge Whites’ majority position. As noted by Kim (2023), one aspect of the model minority myth and Asian Americans’ position as ‘not-Black’ is to work against such coalition building. Thus, one recommendation is to promote a superordinate identity such as “person/people of color” (PoC, see Pérez, 2021), which may be an effective tactic for minority coalition building (Lieng et al., 2024). Similarly, experiences of shared discrimination enhance one's identity as a PoC, leading to improved out-group attitudes and greater policy support (Pérez et al., 2024). Efforts to improve critical consciousness may also create more solidarity as Asian Americans who score high on this dimension also report supporting anti-racist movements such as Black Lives Matter (Matriano et al., 2021).

Beyond superordinate identities, the contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954) can lead to improved inter-minority group relations. While less commonly studied in the field (Paluck et al., 2021), some advocacy groups seek to connect across inter-minority group divides. For example, multiracial coalitions such as the Black-Korean Alliance (BKA), which arose following the 1992 LA Riots, and Faith and Community Empowerment (FACE) bridge the Asian American community and other racial minorities by easing intergroup tensions and fostering collaboration (Dixson, 2022). This collaborative element is vital as historical and contemporary power and status differences may mean other racial minority groups would approach inter-minority coalition building with suspicion or disinterest. Still, such groups can make apparent Poon's (2024) framework of “just us” versus “justice”; that is, when advocacy works just for the interests of a single racial minority group (e.g., Ozawa v. United States, 1922), compared to justice for all racial minority groups (e.g., Lau v. Nicholas, 1974).

While the SFFA v. Harvard (2023) decision eliminated affirmative action, it is important to recognize that inter-minority group coalitions can still create equity-centered change. For example, such groups can highlight racial disparities that exist and thus the need for such policies. Inter-minority group coalitions could also argue against inequitable practices such as standardized testing (Au, 2009) and diversity-hindering practices such as legacy admissions and elite sports recruiting (Grossman et al., 2024). Additionally, new admission practices (Poon & Bastedo, 2022) could be envisioned and advocated for, such as affirmative action along socio-economic status. In sum, while race-based affirmative action has been eliminated, it is possible to lay the groundwork for it to return while also working toward other practices to promote racial equity in college admissions.

Conclusion

The SFFA vs. Harvard (2023) decision was the conclusion of a decades-long positioning of Asian Americans against affirmative action and a pitting of minority groups against each other. Here, framing this case within social psychological research on privilege and inter-minority group relations advances policy recommendations that work to build racial minority coalitions. Overall, Asian Americans “…should work toward a bolder reconstruction of society. In coalition with all those genuinely committed to social justice, we can together pursue a transformative program of social and economic expansion informed by the sort of deep democratic inclusion that places those least privileged at the forefront.” (Chin et al., 1996, p. 1057).

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Nicholas P. Alt

Sydney Cho

Sasha Wong

Koen Youngs

References

Aberson

C. L.

(2007). Diversity experiences predict changes in attitudes toward affirmative action. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13(4), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/1099-9809.13.4.285

Allport

G. W.

(1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.

Alt

N. P.

Goh

J. X.

(2024). Pervasive and pernicious underestimation of Asian Americans’ support for affirmative action. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 24(3), 757–776. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12398

APIA Vote, AAPI Data, Asian Americans Advancing Justice. (2022). 2022 Asian American Voter Survey. https://aapidata.com/2022-aavs/

(2009). Unequal by design: High-stakes testing and the standardization of inequality. Routledge.

(2024). “How does it feel to be a solution?”: Asian American racialization and the politics of U.S. education. Multicultural Education Review, 16(4), 247–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615X.2024.2438447

Case

K. A.

(2007). Raising white privilege awareness and reducing racial prejudice: Assessing diversity course effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4), 231–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701700250

Cheryan

Monin

(2005). “Where are you really from?”: Asian Americans and identity denial. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(5), 717–730. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.717

Chin

G. J.

Cho

Kang

F. H.

(1996). Beyond self-interest: Asian Pacific Americans toward a community of justice. UCLA Asian Pacific American Law Journal, 4(1), 129–162. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45456663

10.

Cortland

C. I.

Craig

M. A.

Shapiro

J. R.

Richeson

J. A.

Neel

Goldstein

N. J.

(2017). Solidarity through shared disadvantage: Highlighting shared experiences of discrimination improves relations between stigmatized groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(4), 547–567. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000100

11.

Craig

M. A.

Lee

M. M.

(2022). Status-based coalitions: Hispanic growth affects Whites’ perceptions of political support from Asian Americans. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(3), 661–681. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211032286

12.

Craig

M. A.

Richeson

J. A.

(2012). Coalition or derogation? How perceived discrimination influences intraminority intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 759–777. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026481

13.

Craig

M. A.

Richeson

J. A.

(2014). On the precipice of a “majority-minority” America: Perceived status threat from the racial demographic shift affects White Americans’ political ideology. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1189–1197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614527113

14.

Craig

M. A.

Richeson

J. A.

(2016). Stigma-based solidarity: Understanding the psychological foundations of conflict and coalition among members of different stigmatized groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415611252

15.

Craig

M. A.

Zou

L. X.

Bai

Lee

M. M.

(2022). Stereotypes about political attitudes and coalitions among U.S. racial groups: Implications for strategic political decision-making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(9), 1349–1366. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211037134

16.

Crenshaw

(1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

17.

Danbold

Huo

Y. J.

(2015). No longer “all-American”? Whites’ defensive reactions to their numerical decline. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(2), 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614546355

18.

Devos

Banaji

M. R.

(2005). American = white? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 447–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.447

19.

Dixson

(2022, April 30). 3 decades after LA riots’ violence, leaders call for unity, healing. Daily News. https://www.dailynews.com/2022/04/29/3-decades-after-la-riots-violence-leaders-call-for-unity-healing/

20.

Executive Order No. 11246, 30 Fed. Reg. 12319. (Sept. 28, 1965).

21.

Fisher v. University of Texas, 570 U.S. 297. (2013).

22.

Fitzsimmons

E. G.

Rubinstein

(2025, June 12). Mamdani’s face was altered in a rejected campaign flier for Cuomo. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/12/nyregion/cuomo-mamdani-debate.html

23.

Freire

(1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Herder and Herder.

24.

Gaertner

S. L.

Dovidio

J. F.

Anastasio

P. A.

Bachman

B. A.

Rust

M. C.

(1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779343000004

25.

Goh

J. X.

Douglas

(2025). Perceived zero-sum competition between Asian Americans and Black Americans. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1461672251365061. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672251365061

26.

Gong Lum v. Rice, 275 U.S. 78. (1927).

27.

Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244. (2003).

28.

Grossman

Tomkins

Page

Goel

(2024). The disparate impacts of college admissions policies on Asian American applicants. Scientific Reports, 14, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-55119-0

29.

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306. (2003).

30.

Heberle

A. E.

Rapa

L. J.

Farago

(2020). Critical consciousness in children and adolescents: A systematic review, critical assessment, and recommendations for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 146(6), 525–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000230

31.

Hinger

(2018, October 18). Meet Edward Blum, the man who wants to kill affirmative action in higher education. American Civil Liberties Union. https://www.aclu.org/news/racial-justice/meet-edward-blum-man-who-wants-kill-affirmative-action-higher

32.

Huang

T. J.

(2021). Perceived discrimination and intergroup commonality among Asian Americans. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 7(2), 180–200. https://doi.org/10.7758/rsf.2021.7.2.09

33.

Johnson

B. D.

Betsinger

(2009). Punishing the “model minority”: Asian-American criminal sentencing outcomes in federal district courts. Criminology: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 47(4), 1045–1090. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2009.00169.x

34.

Jost

J. T.

Banaji

M. R.

Nosek

B. A.

(2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x

35.

Jun

Phillips

L. T.

Foster-Gimbel

O. A.

(2023). The missing middle: Asian employees’ experience of workplace discrimination and pro-black allyship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(2), 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001068

36.

Kawai

(2005). Stereotyping Asian Americans: The dialectic of the model minority and the yellow peril. Howard Journal of Communications, 16(2), 109–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646170590948974

37.

Kim

C. J.

(1999). The racial triangulation of Asian Americans. Politics & Society, 27(1), 105–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329299027001005

38.

Kim

C. J.

(2018). Are asians the new blacks?: Affirmative action, anti-blackness, and the ‘sociometry’ of race. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 15(2), 217–244. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X18000243

39.

Kim

C. J.

(2023). Asian Americans in an anti-Black world. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009222280

40.

Knowles

E. D.

Lowery

B. S.

Chow

R. M.

Unzueta

M. M.

(2014). Deny, distance, or dismantle? How White Americans manage a privileged identity. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 594–609. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614554658

41.

Kraus

M. W.

Vinluan

A. C.

(2023). Reminders of Japanese redress increase Asian American support for black reparations. Nature Communications Psychology, 1(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-023-00033-w

42.

Krogstad

J. M.

Cox

(2023, January 20). What Black Americans say is needed to overcome racial inequality. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/01/20/for-black-history-month-a-look-at-what-black-americans-say-is-needed-to-overcome-racial-inequality/

43.

Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563. (1974).

44.

Lee

Tran

V. C.

(2019). The mere mention of Asians in affirmative action. Sociological Science, 6(21), 551–579. https://doi.org/10.15195/v6.a21

45.

Lee

Zhou

(2015). The Asian American achievement paradox. Russell Sage Foundation.

46.

Lee

S. J.

Wong

N.-W. A.

Alvarez

A. N.

(2009). The model minority and the perpetual foreigner: Stereotypes of Asian Americans. In Asian American psychology: Current perspectives (pp. 69–84). Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.

47.

Lieng

Atkin

A. L.

Kim

A. Y.

C. S.

(2024). Are Asian Americans BIPOC (black, indigenous, and people of color)? internalization of the model minority stereotype and COVID-19 racial bias on interracial solidarity toward black Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 31(4), 660–670. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000698

48.

Matriano

Atkin

A. L.

Yoo

H. C.

Gabriel

A. K.

(2021). Asian American college students’ support for black lives matter: Role of internalizing the model minority myth and critical reflection. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 12(4), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/aap0000250

49.

Meyers

Kim

Kawakami

(2024). Diversity perceptions and neighborhood preferences for visual representations of mixed racial groups. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 24631. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-76599-0

50.

Nicholson

H. L.

Yoo

Okazaki

Chang

D. F.

Craig

M. A.

(2025). Inter-minority relations: Factors shaping cognitive and affective intergroup attitudes between Asian and Black Americans. Social Problems, spae075. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spae075

51.

Norton

M. I.

Sommers

S. R.

(2011). Whites see racism as a zero-sum game that they are now losing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(3), 215–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611406922

52.

D. C.

Eguchi

(2022). Racial privilege as a function of white supremacy and contextual advantages for Asian Americans. Communication, Culture & Critique, 15(4), 471–478. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcac026

53.

Ouch

Moradi

(2022). Asian American people's intragroup and intergroup collective action: Identifying key correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 69(4), 430–442. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000606

54.

Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178. (1922).

55.

Paluck

E. L.

Porat

Clark

C. S.

Green

D. P.

(2021). Prejudice reduction: Progress and challenges. Annual Review of Psychology, 72(1), 533–560. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619

56.

Pérez

Rogbeer

Tran

Huynh

Ortiz

Crossley

Halili

Lee

Lempert

Morel

Passananti

(2025). Rage against the machine? Why system justification drives (some) Asian Americans to spurn racial solidarity. The Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics, 10(3), 697–718. https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2025.26

57.

Pérez

Vicuña

Ramos

(2024). Taking stock of solidarity between people of color: A mini meta-analysis of five experiments. American Political Science Review, 118(3), 1549–1555. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055423001120

58.

Pérez

E. O.

(2021). Diversity's child: People of color and the politics of identity. University of Chicago Press.

59.

Phillips

L. T.

Lowery

B. S.

(2015). The hard-knock life? Whites claim hardships in response to racial inequity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 61, 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.06.008

60.

Phillips

L. T.

Lowery

B. S.

(2018). Herd invisibility: The psychology of racial privilege. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(3), 156–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417753600

61.

Pinedo

Kubi

Espinoza

A. J.

Gonzalez

Diemer

M. A.

(2025). Ethnic studies and student development: Cultivating racially marginalized adolescents’ critical consciousness. Developmental Psychology, 61(1), 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001850

62.

Poon

O. A.

(2024). Asian American is not a color: Conversations on race, affirmative action, and family. Beacon Press.

63.

Poon

O. A.

Bastedo

M. N.

(2022). Rethinking college admissions: Research-based practice and policy. Harvard Education Press.

64.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265. (1978).

65.

Sanchez

D. T.

Chaney

K. E.

Manuel

S. K.

Remedios

J. D.

(2018). Theory of prejudice and American identity threat transfer for Latino and Asian Americans. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(7), 972–983. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218759288

66.

Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181. (2023).

67.

Sue

D. W.

Bucceri

Lin

A. I.

Nadal

K. L.

Torino

G. C.

(2007). Racial microaggressions and the Asian American experience. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13(1), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/1099-9809.13.1.72

68.

Tajfel

Turner

(1979). An integrative theory of inter-group conflict. In Williams

J. A.

Worchel

(Eds.), The social psychology of inter-group relations (pp. 33–47). Wadsworth.

69.

Takao Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178. (1922).

70.

Teranishi

(2017). The attitudes of Asian Americans toward affirmative action. National Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander Research in Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED573712

71.

Tran

Curtin

(2017). Not your model minority: Own-group activism among Asian Americans. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 23(4), 499–507. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000145

72.

Trawalter

Higginbotham

G. D.

Henderson

(2022). Social psychological research on racism and the importance of historical context: Implications for policy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 31(6), 493–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214221114092

73.

United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, 261 U.S. 204. (1923).

74.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649. (1898).

75.

Varma

(2004). Asian Americans: Achievements mask challenges. Asian Journal of Social Science, 32(2), 290–307. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568531041705103

76.

Wang

S. C.

Santos

B. M. C.

(2023). At the intersection of the model minority myth and antiblackness: From Asian American triangulation to recommendations for solidarity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 70(4), 352–366. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000662

77.

Wilkins

C. L.

Wellman

J. D.

Babbitt

L. G.

Toosi

N. R.

Schad

K. D.

(2015). You can win but I can’t lose: Bias against high-status groups increases their zero-sum beliefs about discrimination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 57, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.10.008

78.

(2022, November 2). Asian Americans helped build affirmative action . What happened? Slate. https://slate.com/human-interest/2022/11/affirmative-action-proportionality-history-activism.html

79.

Todd

N. R.

(2021). Internalized model minority myth among Asian Americans: Links to anti-black attitudes and opposition to affirmative action. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 27(4), 569–578. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000448

80.

Zhang

(2018, April 19). Wechatting American politics: Misinformation, polarization, and immigrant Chinese media. Columbia Journalism Review. https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/wechatting-american-politics-misinformation-polarization-and-immigrant-chinese-media.php

81.

Zhang

Benton

(2022). Hate crimes against Asian Americans. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 47(3), 441–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09602-9

82.

Zou

L. X.

Cheryan

(2017). Two axes of subordination: A new model of racial position. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(5), 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000080

83.

Zou

L. X.

Ngum

(2025). Status- and foreignness-based discrimination experiences shape feelings of similarity among people of color. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 121, 104794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104794