UC Lawsuit / Anti-DEI Orders / Welcome Home
A new lawsuit accuses the University of California system of discriminating against Asian and white applicants, reigniting the debate over race in admissions.
The Rebel Yellow – Issue 28
A new lawsuit accuses the University of California system of discriminating against Asian and white applicants, reigniting the debate over race in admissions. President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting diversity, equity and inclusion programs face legal challenges, while the U.S. Postal Service reverses its decision to suspend shipments from China and Hong Kong. In the Philippines, Vice President Sara Duterte is impeached, marking a major political shift. Meanwhile, a World War II airman’s remains return home after 80 years, Ke Huy Quan is honored in Hollywood, H&M sparks backlash over a “banh mi” hoodie, and doctors document a rare case of a fetus growing inside a child’s skull.
Here’s what you need to know.
University of California system accused of discriminating against Asian, white applicants
A newly formed group called Students Against Racial Discrimination (SARD) filed a federal lawsuit Monday against the University of California (UC) system, alleging the university network discriminates against Asian American and white applicants in its admissions process despite a decades-old state ban on considering race.
The lawsuit comes amid heightened national scrutiny of diversity initiatives in higher education following the Supreme Court’s June 2023 decision striking down race-conscious admissions at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. While some universities have seen declines (1, 2) in Black and Latino enrollment following the ruling, UC has maintained or increased its diversity numbers — a fact that stands at the center of this legal challenge.
The allegations
The complaint, filed in California’s Central District federal court, claims UC gives “discriminatory preferences to non-Asian racial minorities” in violation of multiple laws:
Proposition 209, California’s 1996 voter-approved ban on considering race in public education and employment
The Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits racial discrimination by recipients of federal funding
The plaintiffs allege that UC gradually brought back racial preferences in recent years to address public concerns over low Black and Hispanic enrollment numbers at top campuses. They claim the system’s admissions practices allow students with inferior academic credentials to gain admission at the expense of better-qualified Asian American and white applicants.
The lawsuit brings together several influential figures in the ongoing national debate over race in college admissions. Richard Sander, a UCLA law professor and longtime affirmative action opponent, helped found SARD and has been a driving force behind the legal challenge. The plaintiffs are represented by Jonathan Mitchell, a former Texas solicitor general who won the case allowing President Donald Trump to remain on the Colorado ballot. The legal team also includes lawyers from America First Legal, an organization founded by Stephen Miller, who currently serves as Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser.
Historical context
The impact of Proposition 209 was immediate and dramatic when it first took effect. At UC Berkeley’s law school, the first class after the proposition’s passage included only one Black student, who had been admitted before the referendum. Similarly, UCLA faced its own crisis in 2006 when only 96 Black students enrolled as freshmen — the lowest number since 1973. Of those students, 20 were athletes.
UC through the years has transformed its admissions approach from a simple “academic index” based on test scores and GPA to a comprehensive review system. Under the current approach, admissions officers consider a total of 13 factors, including (1) academic grade point average in all completed A-G courses, (2) special talents, achievements and awards in a particular field and (3) academic accomplishments “in light of your life experiences and special circumstances,” to name a few. Additionally, the system eliminated SAT and ACT testing requirements. It has also implemented targeted recruitment and college preparatory courses aimed at disadvantaged students.
What UC is saying
UC strongly denies the allegations. In a statement Tuesday, the university network said they would “vigorously defend” their admission practices, calling it “a meritless suit that seeks to distract us from our mission to provide California students with a world class education.”
“Since the consideration of race in admissions was banned in California in 1996, the University of California has adjusted its admissions practices to comply with the law,” Stett Holbrook, a communications strategist for the UC Office of the President, said in a statement. “The UC undergraduate admissions application collects students’ race and ethnicity for statistical purposes only. This information is not shared with application reviewers and is not used for admission.”
Officials note that the system has increased overall undergraduate enrollment and diversity through several race-neutral strategies initiated over the past decade. These include capping out-of-state enrollment to prioritize California students, providing additional funding support at high-demand campuses and focusing on socioeconomic factors in their holistic review process. Rather than comparing applicants against the entire pool, admissions directors evaluate them more directly against peers from their schools or similar socioeconomic circumstances.
State of play
Recent UC enrollment statistics paint a nuanced picture that could challenge some of the lawsuit’s claims. Fall 2024 data shows that:
Asian Americans maintain the highest admission rates among first-year California applicants systemwide at 76.6%
Asian Americans comprise 36.3% of UC undergraduates, despite representing only 19% of California high school graduates who meet UC admission requirements
At UC Berkeley, Asian Americans had the highest admission rate at 16.3%
At UCLA, Asian American admission rates (10.4%) were comparable to Black student rates (10.6%)
The system’s overall demographic makeup shows both progress and ongoing challenges in achieving representation. Latinos, who make up more than half of California’s high school graduates, represent 26.7% of UC’s student body — the second-largest group after Asian Americans. White students comprise 19.8% of enrollment, while Black students make up 4.8%, a slight increase from previous years.
Some of these shifts reflect changing demographics in the qualified applicant pool. The number of Latino graduates from California high schools who met UC admission requirements grew significantly, reaching 108,145 in 2023-2024 from 87,275 in 2016-2017. During the same period, the number of qualified Black graduates slightly decreased, from 9,174 to 8,998.
What’s next
The plaintiffs are seeking several significant changes to UC’s admissions process, including blocking the system from asking about race in student applications and appointing a court monitor to oversee admission decisions. They aim to force the university to “select applicants for admission in a color-blind and race-neutral manner.”
Mitchell, representing the plaintiffs, has indicated this case is part of a broader legal campaign, warning that more challenges are coming. “Universities continue to defy the law by using race and sex preferences in student admissions and faculty hiring,” he said. “We will keep suing them until they adopt colorblind admissions and rid themselves of every last vestige of these odious and discriminatory practices.”
Trump sued over anti-DEI orders
A coalition of education leaders, civil rights organizations and local government officials filed a federal lawsuit Monday challenging President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. Asian Americans Advancing Justice — AAJC has joined Democracy Forward in representing the plaintiffs, marking a significant step in the Asian American community’s fight to preserve DEI initiatives nationwide.
Driving the news
Trump issued two sweeping executive orders in his first 48 hours in office that have already caused significant disruption across institutions. The Jan. 20 order mandated the closure of federal diversity offices, triggered widespread dismissals of DEI staff and directed the termination of “equity-related” grants and contracts. At the Education Department, dozens of general staff members who attended DEI training in the past have reportedly been put on administrative leave.
The Jan. 21 order, on the other hand, expanded the scope to target publicly traded companies and universities with billion-dollar endowments. It directed the attorney general and education secretary to create guidance for colleges on complying with the 2023 Supreme Court ruling against affirmative action. The order empowers the secretary to investigate up to nine colleges with endowments over $1 billion as part of what the order calls an effort “to deter DEI programs or principles.”
About the suit
The 40-page lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Maryland, directly confronts Trump’s attempts to dismantle DEI programs across federal government, higher education and the private sector. “In the United States, there is no king,” the lawsuit declares, arguing that Trump has exceeded his constitutional authority and asking the court for both preliminary and permanent injunctions to block the orders.
The coalition bringing the challenge includes the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE), the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), Restaurant Opportunities Centers United (ROC United) and the mayor and city council of Baltimore. The suit names Trump, nine government departments and their corresponding cabinet officers, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), as defendants.
Dive deeper
The lawsuit presents multiple constitutional challenges through the following arguments:
It contends that the orders violate the Fifth Amendment by being too vague, failing to define critical terms like “DEI,” “equity” and “illegal DEIA” and not providing clear criteria for enforcement. Without clear definitions, the lawsuit argues, “people of common intelligence” must guess at what is prohibited.
It argues that the second order infringes on First Amendment rights by threatening free speech rights of university professors and diversity officers, dampening academic freedom and public discourse, and chilling activities and provision of essential services. “The Constitution protects the right of scholars, teachers, and researchers to think, speak and teach without governmental interference,” the plaintiffs assert.
It challenges the separation of powers, arguing that Trump lacks the authority to unilaterally terminate equity-related grants and questioning the president’s power to dictate government fund allocation.
The big picture
The legal challenge comes amid escalating tensions over DEI initiatives. Trump has blamed DEI for various national issues, including inflation and recent transportation accidents. The orders follow a pattern of state-level actions against DEI programs, with colleges in states such as Florida and Texas taking action to comply with anti-DEI measures, including laying off staff and shutting down cultural centers.
The case is being led by Democracy Forward, the same legal group that recently succeeded in temporarily blocking Trump’s order to pause trillions in federal spending. Advancing Justice — AAJC are also representing the plaintiffs.
“The president’s anti-DEIA executive orders are attempts to cause panic and suppress, selectively, any idea or expression that isn’t aligned with his own views under the guise of uplifting merit,” Advancing Justice — AAJC President and Executive Director John C. Yang said in a statement shared with The Rebel Yellow. “In turn, these orders are backpedaling on years of progress and will result in further division, discrimination, inequity and exclusion.”
“The president cannot stifle our rights and override our democratic processes simply because he feels like it. We are committed to standing up to fight for access, diversity, equity and inclusion for all.”
USPS quickly flip-flops on China, Hong Kong package suspension
The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) abruptly reversed policy on Wednesday, announcing it would resume accepting packages from China and Hong Kong just hours after implementing a suspension. The initial ban, announced late Tuesday, came in response to President Donald Trump’s Saturday announcement of new tariff measures targeting Chinese imports.
What the USPS is saying
In an update on Wednesday, USPS announced it would “continue accepting all international inbound mail and packages from China and Hong Kong Posts.” The agency indicated it is collaborating with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to develop systems for collecting newly imposed tariffs while minimizing delivery disruptions.
The policy shift follows Trump’s decision to eliminate a longstanding customs exemption known as “de minimis” that had allowed packages valued under $800 to enter the U.S. without paying duties.
Industry response
The swift implementation of the changes has created significant uncertainty across the shipping sector. “There has really been absolutely zero time for anyone to prepare for this,” Maureen Cori, co-founder of New York-based consultancy Supply Chain Compliance, told Reuters. “What we really need is direction from the government on how to handle this.”
Evidence of disruption is already emerging. FedEx has suspended its money-back guarantee for U.S.-bound international shipments effective Jan. 29, citing regulatory changes in a notice on its website. At New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport, customs officers are reportedly temporarily holding all incoming Chinese shipments.
E-commerce impact
The policy changes particularly affect major Chinese online retailers. In 2023, the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party reported that Chinese platforms Temu and Shein likely account for more than 30% of all de minimis shipments entering the U.S. from China.
The Congressional Research Service has documented a dramatic increase in Chinese low-value exports to the U.S., rising from $5.3 billion in 2018 to $66 billion in 2023. Together, these platforms have captured approximately 17% of America’s discount market for consumer goods.
Diplomatic tensions
China’s response was swift and direct. At a regular press briefing, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian characterized the U.S. actions as “unreasonable suppression” and called for an end to the “politicizing of trade and economic issues.”
Beijing has announced its own countermeasures. These include new tariffs on U.S. goods: 15% on coal and liquefied natural gas, and 10% on crude oil, agricultural machinery and large-engine vehicles.
What’s next
The complexity of the matter suggests potential ongoing disruption. Trump and President Xi Jinping were expected to talk about each other’s tariffs over the phone on Tuesday, but that call is yet to happen as Trump says he is in “no rush” to engage with his Chinese counterpart.
The Philippines’ lower house impeaches Vice President Sara Duterte
Following years of political prominence and the enduring influence of her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte, Philippine Vice President Sara Duterte was impeached by the House of Representatives on Feb. 5. The impeachment marks a significant turning point for the Duterte family, whose political clout has shaped the country's leadership in recent years.
The short-lived Duterte-Marcos alliance
Sara Duterte's political career began in Davao City, where she served as mayor, succeeding her father. In the 2022 national elections, she formed a political alliance with Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr., the son of late dictator and former President Ferdinand Marcos who was ousted in a 1986 pro-democracy uprising. Their tandem, known as the UniTeam Alliance, achieved a landslide victory, with Marcos elected as president and Duterte as vice president. Upon assuming office, Duterte also took on the role of Secretary of Education.
Symbolizing a unification of two powerful political dynasties, the Marcos-Duterte partnership initially appeared strong. However, tensions emerged between the two leaders just months after assuming power. Differences in policy perspectives, particularly regarding foreign relations and internal governance, strained their relationship. The rift became public when Duterte resigned from her cabinet position as Secretary of Education in June 2024, citing "political toxicity" as a primary reason.
“Tyrannical abuse of power”
The impeachment, a historic first against a sitting Philippine vice president, was backed by 215 legislators, which include the president’s son, Rep. Sandro Marcos, along with House Speaker Martin Romualdez, the president’s first cousin and a key political ally. The charges against Duterte span a wide range of alleged offenses, from corruption and assassination threats to unexplained wealth and failure to defend national sovereignty:
Misuse of confidential funds: Allegations of graft and corruption against Duterte stemmed from a House investigation into the alleged misuse of 612.5 million pesos ($10.5 million) in confidential and intelligence funds allocated to her offices as vice president and education secretary. The months-long investigation scrutinized the rapid expenditure of these funds, with critics arguing that such opaque spending indicated a misuse of taxpayer money.
Assassination threats: In a November 2024 online press conference, Duterte stated that she had contracted an assassin to kill President Marcos, his wife Liza Araneta-Marcos and House Speaker Martin Romualdez if she were to be assassinated. While she later clarified that her remarks were not direct threats but expressions of concern for her safety, the statements intensified the political rift between her and President Marcos. Such comments are viewed as highly inappropriate and alarming, especially coming from a high-ranking official.
Unexplained wealth: Duterte was accused of amassing unexplained wealth and failing to disclose all her properties and interests in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN), violating constitutional requirements. In the Philippines, transparency in declaring assets is crucial for public officials to prevent corruption and maintain public trust.
Involvement in extrajudicial killings: Allegations were made linking Duterte to extrajudicial killings during her tenure as mayor of Davao City, suggesting her involvement in the Davao Death Squad, a group implicated in numerous summary executions. These allegations echo the controversies surrounding her father's administration, which faced international scrutiny for its brutal anti-drug campaign.
"Duterte’s conduct throughout her tenure clearly displays gross faithlessness against public trust and a tyrannical abuse of power," the impeachment complaint stated.
While Duterte’s camp has alleged that the move is a calculated power play by the Marcos administration ahead of the 2028 presidential elections, Marcos has denied direct involvement, stating, “The executive cannot have a hand in this process. Congress has its own way of doing things.”
Political numbers game
The outcome of this trial will significantly impact Duterte's political career and could reshape the political landscape of the Philippines. If convicted, she would be permanently disqualified from holding any public office, effectively ending any future political aspirations, including a potential presidential bid in 2028. However, the result will depend on the political affiliations and loyalties of both incumbent and incoming senators.
Political analysts view the impeachment trial as a "political numbers game" heavily influenced by the upcoming midterm elections in May. The Senate, responsible for conducting the impeachment trial, is currently in recess and will reconvene on June 2, following the elections. This timing means that the composition of the Senate could change significantly before the trial begins. Half of the 24-member Senate will be replaced by newly elected senators whose terms start on June 30. A two-thirds majority vote (16 out of 24 senators) is required to convict and remove Duterte from office, making the election results a critical factor in the impeachment process.
WWII airman’s remains return home after 80 years
After eight long decades, the remains of U.S. Army Air Force Staff Sgt. Yuen Hop have finally been returned home to the San Francisco Bay Area. Margery Wong, his 93-year-old sister, welcomed him in an emotional ceremony at the San Francisco International Airport last Friday, Jan. 31.
Hop, who was just 20 years old when his plane was shot down by heavy anti-aircraft fire over Germany in 1944, was honored with a flag-draped casket ceremony on the airport tarmac. A San Francisco Police Department motorcade, accompanied by U.S. Army personnel and United Service Organizations Northern California (USO NorCal) members, escorted the procession to Duggan’s Serra Mortuary in Daly City.
The breakthrough in locating Hop’s remains first came in 2013 when researchers uncovered documents about three captured airmen in a War Crimes case, revealing that he had been captured and killed by German SS troops and buried in a cemetery in the town of Kamp-Bornhofen. The discovery, combined with DNA analysis and an information match, brought closure to the case that had been declared non-recoverable after years of unsuccessful search efforts.
Wong, who received the life-changing phone call in June 2024, said the news was almost unbelievable. “We were in West Portal, and we were walking, and then the phone rang. I was wondering if it was really true or not,” she told ABC7 News’ Dion Lim. The nonagenarian, who was just around 12 when her brother enlisted, remembers the impact his disappearance had on their family, who were the only Chinese family in Sebastopol at the time.
The return of Hop’s remains coincided with Chinese New Year, adding deeper significance to the homecoming. “Being that it’s Chinese New Year. There were about 50 or 60 people out there with all the servicemen. The passengers were on the plane and they were all looking getting to the windows...it’s very different. All this attention. Different in a good way,” Wong told Lim.
Hop, who was awarded the Purple Heart, Prisoner of War Medal and numerous other decorations posthumously, will be laid to rest with full military honors at Golden Gate National Cemetery in San Bruno following a memorial service today.
“Goonies” cast reunites to honor Ke Huy Quan's Hollywood legacy
Key cast members of the 1985 classic film "The Goonies" gathered to celebrate their co-star Ke Huy Quan's hand-and-footprint ceremony at the TCL Chinese Theatre in Los Angeles on Monday. Screenwriter Chris Columbus and actors Corey Feldman, Jeff Cohen, Kerri Green and Josh Brolin were present to honor the 53-year-old star's achievements.
During the ceremony, Brolin read a letter from executive producer Steven Spielberg, who praised Quan's career resurgence: "I'm proud of you for your meteoric rise as a child and then your second meteoric rise as a grown-up, and believe me, very few of us get two bites of that apple." Brolin himself lauded Quan as "truly one of the last existences of the American dream."
Quan, who portrayed the inventive Data in "The Goonies," expressed his deep appreciation for the reunion and the enduring bond among the cast. While a sequel remains uncertain, he has expressed enthusiasm about the possibility of reprising his role.
H&M, here’s why the internet is making fun of your “authentic” banh mi hoodie
The internet is having a field day with Swedish fast fashion retailer H&M for a "Banh Mi Authentic Vietnamese" hoodie that, well, isn't exactly authentic. The garment features an illustration of a sandwich that many have pointed out inaccurately represents the traditional Vietnamese banh mi, including ingredients like cheese and lettuce.
The design was spotlighted in several Reddit posts and a TikTok video. In the clip, a man scrutinizes the hoodie, stating, "This is not even banh mi," while a woman off-camera adds, "That looks like [an] Italian [sandwich]."
Anatomy of an authentic banh mì
For context, a traditional banh mi is a Vietnamese sandwich that harmoniously blends a crispy baguette with fillings such as:
Protein: Typically grilled pork, chicken or liver pate. Other options include thinly sliced ham, cold cuts or tofu for a vegetarian version.
Pickled vegetables: Pickled carrots and daikon radish provide a sweet and tangy flavor contrast.
Fresh herbs: Cilantro, mint and basil add a refreshing aromatic dimension.
Chili: Birdseye chili (Ớt Hiểm) or other chilies provide a spicy kick.
Spreads: Mayonnaise, sometimes mixed with butter, adds richness and moisture. In some cases, both pate and mayonnaise are generously spread on the bread, creating a unique savory base for the sandwich.
Notably absent from this list are cheese and lettuce, the ingredients that had commenters comparing it to everything from an Italian sub to, well, anything BUT a banh mi. "Who would ever put tomatoes & cheese on a banh mi," one user exclaimed. Another questioned, "They don’t have people who double or triple check and approve designs?"
Not the first time
H&M’s apparent failed attempt to celebrate Vietnamese cuisine highlights the importance of cultural awareness and accurate representation in product design. It raises questions about the due diligence and cultural sensitivity practices within the fashion industry, particularly when referencing and profiting from diverse cultures.
This incident is not the first time H&M has faced accusations of cultural insensitivity. In 2018, the company received backlash for an advertisement featuring a Black child model wearing a hoodie with a racially insensitive slogan. The incident led to boycotts and financial losses for the company.
Trapped twins: How a fetus grew inside a 1-year-old girl’s skull
Doctors at a Beijing hospital have documented an extraordinary case of fetus-in-fetu (FIF) occurring within the skull of a 1-year-old girl, shedding new light on the exceedingly rare condition that affects roughly one in every 500,000 births.
The case, detailed in the American Journal of Case Reports in June 2024, involved the young patient at Peking University International Hospital. The signs began during a routine prenatal checkup at 33 weeks, when doctors first noticed abnormalities in her developing skull. Though she was delivered by caesarean section at 37 weeks with an enlarged head, it was not until a year later that the full gravity of her condition became apparent.
By then, the child’s development had fallen significantly behind. She struggled with basic milestones — unable to stand or raise her head properly — and could only speak one word: “mom.” When doctors investigated further, they discovered a mass 13 centimeters (5.12 inches) in diameter within her skull. What they found during surgery was remarkable: a white capsule containing an immature embryo 18 centimeters (7.09 inches) long, complete with spine, bones and the beginnings of facial features, hair and limbs.
Despite the surgical team’s efforts, the compression on the child’s brain proved too severe. After 12 days of post-operative seizures, her family made the difficult decision to remove life support.
The researchers noted that the condition is particularly lethal when it occurs in the head. While 80% of fetus-in-fetu cases reportedly occur in the abdomen — where surgical removal has a higher success rate — intracranial cases pose unique challenges due to the sensitive location and resulting pressure on the brain.
Fetus-in-fetu, otherwise known as cryptodidymus, results from a rare complication during identical twin development, when a single fertilized egg splits but does not separate completely during early division. In this process, one embryo becomes enveloped by the other, sustained by its twin’s blood supply but unable to develop fully.
The condition’s origins “remain a mystery,” according to the Beijing team, though potential factors range from environmental pollution and genetics to pesticide exposure during pregnancy. While the condition itself is extraordinarily rare, finding it within the skull is even more unusual — with only at least 18 such cases documented in medical literature.