Well, if one goes deeper into that, it gets more complex - the various tribes recognized by the US government, are actually “nations within a nation”, a result of the rather strange methods by which the tribes were annexed into the US as pseudo-independent protectorates. This is why reservation police are mentioned as separate entities on legal documents regarding laws and jurisdiction. So yes, their family backgrounds do grant them certain rights, as a result of treaties that go back decades. For example, under an 1868 treaty, the Shoshone tribe can hunt on national land without interruption. The Fort Bridger treaty states that “The Indians.... shall have the right to hunt on the unoccupied lands of the United States so long as game may be found there on, and so long as peace subsists among the whites and Indians, on the borders of the hunting districts.”
And if I could provide a document that said my Great-great grandfather owned your great-great grandfather, and any offspring he fathered, was to be passed down through my family; would I now own you? At some point in time, both documents would be equally legally valid. Times have changed. What was reasonable then, is no longer reasonable now. We are either 'equal' or we are not.