Depends upon the time period, and whether you mean "native American" Indian, or "East Indian," (those aforementioned natives being, presumably, western Indian). Not too far back, I imagine that anyone who did not at first glance appear American (white and western) probably found themselves discriminated against. In terms of the native American Indian types, well, there's a long and disappointing history of discrimination, there. But as recently as, oh, say the 1970s, when I was a wee tyke in school, we Indian and partial Indian kiddos were pulled out of regular classes for special ones a few times a week so that we could learn about native American Indian heritage. Why this was apparently unimportant to the other school kids I'll never know, but I can now twine yarn around some sticks like nobody's business to a make an interesting variety of household knick-knacks. Now, was this discriminatory? Not really. At least not in the way that we usually mean by that word. I just saw it as a happy opportunity to get out of the usual classes and do something different. But in my grandfather's generation, or even his father's? At one of those points or the other, they weren't allowed to speak their native lingos in school and were subject to punishment if they did. That seems pretty discriminatory.
Fast forward to my high school and college experiences, and I saw no significant discrimination whatsoever in the classroom toward E-Indians (where is Shusmita, nowadays, I wonder?), or W-Indians, or blacks, or Hispanics, or Asians. What I did see was the usual kid-like nonsense, at least in high school, that was honest ribbing of kids being kids. The few instances of what we call "discriminatory behavior," or, now, "hate speech," almost always came from those colloquially said to possess rough and questionable character.
Those things said, I do happen to have grown up in the cultural center of the universe*, so that may explain my mild experience.
----------------
* SOURCE: Hoyt Axton, Pizza Hut commercial