They have argued that the proper recognition and care of Sitting Bull’s burial is a matter for his direct descendants, not for state governments, tourism interests, or tribal governmental entities that did not represent his immediate family.

They have objected to what they characterize as the commercialization of Sitting Bull’s burial site and legacy.

The DNA study’s findings are relevant to these disputes in that they provide additional documentation of the family’s identity and their specific relationship to Sitting Bull.

But they do not resolve the underlying questions of jurisdiction, authority, and what the appropriate outcome of the burial site dispute would be.

Those questions involve law, tribal governance, state authority, and the specific interests of multiple parties — none of which are determined by a genetic relationship finding.