根據憲法平等權及憲法增修條文第十條之精神，人民無論屬於何 種種族（族群），其在法律上均應享有同等地位，不得有所歧視。 謝紅梅原為大陸地區人民，與臺灣人結婚後獲准來臺定居並設籍 取得身分證。接著參加公務人員初等考試獲錄取，並於取得任用資格 後分發到臺北市社子國小擔任書記。不到一年，臺北市政府以其違反 「兩岸人民關係條例」之規定為由，令其離職。 謝紅梅向臺北市政府提起訴願被駁回，再向臺北高等行政法院提 起行政訴訟。臺北高等行政法院以兩岸關係條例有牴觸憲疑義為由， 聲請憲法解釋。大法官做成釋字618 號解釋，認為兩岸關係條例第二 十一條合憲。 本文擬以「兩岸關係條例第二十一條第一項前段規定是否違憲」 為關切主題，探討憲法上對於種族（族群）平等的保障，並對大法官 做成釋字第618 號解釋加以評論，然後以人權觀點提出建議。

According to the spirit of constitutional right of equal protection and Provision 10 of Constitutional Amendments, there should be no discrimination against the enjoyment of the identical legal status by people no matter what his or her ethnicity is. Ms. Sheh used to be a national in Mainland China, and acquired the identification card by establishing her residency and domicile in Taiwan after she was married to a Taiwanese. Subsequently, she pass the preliminary exam for the post of public officer, and was assigned to the elementary school in Taipei as a employee. Within one year, she was asked to leave the post for the violation of the Act Governing Relations between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area. Ms. Sheh raised the administrative petition to Taipei City Government and was turned down. Consequently, she filed an administrative lawsuit at Taipei High Court of Administration. Taipei High Court of Administration asked for the constitutional review for the possible unconstitutionality of the Act Governing Relations between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area. The Grand Justices made the Opinion 618, and confirmed the Constitutionality of Provision 21 of theAct concerned. This paper focuses its interest on the Constitutionality of Provision 21 of the Act Governing Relations between Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area in order to explore the right of equal protection guaranteed to people of different ethnicity by Constitution, and comments upon the Opinion 618 made by the Grand Justices for the purpose of submitting suggestions from the perspective of human rights.