I'd recommend reading The Color of Law, https://www.epi.org/publication/the-color-of-law-a-forgotten...

> In the Sausalito case, the state said the district had violated the equal protection clause of the California Constitution.

> The settlement, filed in state court in San Francisco...

Sounds like it was (a) not overt (if it took a two-year investigation to establish it), (b) illegal, and (c) eventually punished under preexisting law.

Prevention, through detection (which goes to your point of "(a) not overt (if it took a two-year investigation to establish it)" seems like the better thing for these sorts of circumstances, but is a lot more difficult to achieve. Part of me, possibly naively, believes that transparency is the answer, so that those of us who care can determine things without a 2 year investigation, but that feels... too simplistic. Not sure what a better answer is, though.

> when disadvantages put on Asian individuals are explicitly laid out as systemic and on the basis of their race.

What exactly have I been disadvantaged in?

The areas Asians are disadvantaged in are college admissions and hiring practices. There is an active lawsuit against YouTube for issuing freezes on hiring white and Asian males, on the premise that they needed to hire more people from other racial/ethnic groups. This is simply not something that would happen to another minority group. The people that tend to otherwise fixate on racial identity and collective privilege will typically also conveniently ignore Asians, whose successes in this "white supremacist" nation throw a bit of a wrench in their world view.

I've interviewed with Google multiple times without issue

> whose successes in this "white supremacist" nation throw a bit of a wrench in their world view.

Interesting that you should mention that, because perceived/actual white supremacy is a reason why Asians are voting overwhelmingly against Republicans today.