I disagree with AA completely.
If AA is in effect, I would say that bi-racial people would qualify. In your particular case, Japanese is usually not considered URM.
AA has good arguments in favor of it, as well as against it. I think it's a noble idea gone wrong. Basing AA on socio-economic background rather than race would be a step in the right direction. AA was never intended to assist Carlton Banks or the Huxtable kids.
I disagree that is was ever a good idea, but I do agree the people who started it had good intentions. There was a much stronger arguement (sic) for it after segregation, but I don't think there is any instituional (sic) racism present today, especially at our Universities.

All we can do is roll our eyes. I've given up on actually making a difference.
I shouldn't have said that there is NO institutional racism today, but I would contend that their is very, very little. Especially at American Universities, where diversity is often valued more highly that scholarship and merit. The same can be said about corporations.
What I mean by institutional racism is there isn't a wide scale deliberate attempt to discriminate against minorities in a certain organization. In most cases minorities have the advantage. Anyway, there are plenty of threads on how much AA sucks, I don't think we need another.
That's exactly what institutional racism isn't. Please do some more research before using terms that you don't understand.
Btw, I fixed your quote.

What I mean by institutional racism is there isn't a wide scale deliberate attempt to discriminate against minorities in a certain organization.
I was trying to make the point that although racism still exists ,institutional racism, the wide scale deliberate attempt to discriminate against minorities in an organization, largely does not.
I see what you're getting at, but that's exactly why pikey said that that is what institutional racism is NOT.
If you're trying to say that overt, systematic, structured racism within organizations does not exist anymore, that may be a better argument, although there are still arguments that cut the other way. If you're merely trying to say that it's not accepted anymore and, if it exists, is now covert, we may be in agreement.
But I don't think you're saying the latter.