These disputes involve questions of historical record, of tribal jurisdiction, and of the family’s specific rights as direct descendants — questions that were not resolved by the DNA study and that remain active points of discussion and disagreement.

The DNA study’s finding that the hair sample’s genetic material is consistent with a familial relationship to Ernie LaPointe is relevant to these broader disputes only indirectly.

It supports the family’s claimed identity as Sitting Bull’s direct descendants, which is relevant context for their standing in discussions about his burial.

But it does not establish where Sitting Bull is actually buried, does not resolve the question of whether the 1953 reinterment moved his actual remains, and does not determine what decisions the family, the tribal government, or other parties should or must make regarding the burial site.

Anyone reading the DNA study’s coverage who came away thinking that the genetics resolved the burial dispute would be misinformed.