American citizens of the state of Hawaii must challenge the constitutionality of Hawaii’s Act 195.

The Akina v. State of Hawaii (Office of Hawaiian Affairs) lawsuit filed in federal court on Aug. 13 challenges Act 195, which does not stand muster against the United States Constitution.

Act 195 says, "Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination."

The state Legislature and the governor erred in enacting and approving Act 195 on July 6, 2011, "without" concurrence from the United States, if Native Hawaiians are indigenous.

Native Hawaiians are not indigenous under the definition of federal law.

The "Akaka Bill" was first introduced in Congress in 2001 as S746 and HR617, to define Native Hawaiians as indigenous; it failed.

All citizens of the state of Hawaii arrived to this very special place called Hawaii, as visitors, and made it home.

The transformation of the kingdom into the state of Hawaii started with the 1840 Kingdom Constitution, and over time amended into the 1894 Republic of Hawaii’s Constitution.

The historically significant federal court decisions all certify that the 1898 Newlands Resolution, the 1900 Organic Act and the 1959 Admissions Act are law, and that Hawaii remains multi-ethnic.

Federal court decisions began referencing the three laws beginning with the U.S. Court of Claims that decided the Liliuokalani Dominis v. United States of America on May 16, 1910.

The court decided that net revenue from the former ceded crown lands was "not" due Liliuokalani, and that the former crown lands are owned in fee by the United States, as ceded from the Republic of Hawaii.

Nov. 7, 1978, was the birth of OHA, established as one of the departments with special powers, by the state government. OHA, as a state agency, must conform to the U.S. and state Constitution and laws.

On Feb. 23, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court decided, in conformance to the 15th Amendment, in Rice v. Cayetano, that "all" registered voters of the state can vote in all OHA elections.

Then on Dec. 12, 2002, the 9th Circuit Court decided that "any qualified" citizen of the state of Hawaii can seek elected office to the OHA board of trustees. The decision was in conformance to the 14th and 15th Amendments, and with the Aug. 6, 1965, Voting Rights Act.

On March 31, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Nov. 23, 1993, "Apology Resolution PL 103-150" and the "37 whereas" statements had no standing in the federal courts and that the Hawaii Supreme Court erred in relying on the Apology Resolution in deciding OHA v. State of Hawaii.

I am a 73-year-old yonsei, fourth-generation American of Japanese ancestry, and Hawaii is my home and the United States my country.

My great-grandparents arrived in Hawaii on April 7, 1891, under the Aug. 19, 1871, Kingdom of Hawaii-Japan Treaty of Amity and Commerce.

My grandmother was born in Hawaii on Oct. 17, 1894.

I could qualify for the Native Hawaiian Roll with one of the three statements, by my growing up with a Native Hawaiian family and having a Native Hawaiian step-father.

I am an American and strongly disagree with and oppose Act 195.