That again goes back to my original impression that schools/employers can't challenge a potential candidate's ethnic self-identity. I can't find the specific law or regulation, but I think it was something that was either proposed or maybe even passed into law. Maybe it just affects employers and not schools. Either way it's hard for AAMC to "prove" someone's self-identity, with self identity being the key word. I still haven't heard any suggestions on a reliable way to prove or refute that in an investigation. Asking for background may expose holes if they claim to be involved in the ethnic community. However, if they just claim to be part black/Hispanic, asking questions about their background may not shed any additional light.
You're right, I kinda just threw out two names that I thought of. I do believe the media would have a mixed reaction to something like this, just like there are mixed reactions to the ongoing Harvard case. You also note that Kaling's brother wasn't caught. If we're being honest, that's probably what happens most of the time when someone misrepresents their race/ethnicity.
My eariler comment about race in education becoming a hot topic was more suggesting that perhaps an increasing amount of people are going to try to "game" the system, and more people might start to sue for racial discrimination (i.e. affirmative action cases at Harvard and the Texas school from a few years ago). I wasn't thinking about the media at all. You're right that a judge and jury should be impartial regardless of media and public opinion.
I'm sure people would come out to defend a liar, if they think the liar's actions are justified. Please note that I absolutely do not believe that lying in this case is ethical or justified, just that some people might depending on how they feel about race-conscious admissions policies.