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.