Depending on the political figure it could be if you believe in their religion
In North America in the parts north of the present day Mexico, the First Nations had climatically a more hostile environment to deal with than their counterparts in the now Mexico and Mesoamerica and South America. The winters on the Great Plains and in the now Canadian north were harsh and did not favor large populations to develop (with some exceptions like in British Columbia, Canada which had a mild climate and in which 100's of 1000's of First Nations lived). So the mainly plains Indians had a nomadic existence following the game and fish and so had a more egalitarian less centralized leadership than their counterparts to the south. In Mexico, Mesoamerica and South America, the climate was generally less harsh, and fairly large scale agriculture was practiced and the people were more sedentary and political power was held in the hands of rulers who though they had henchmen, tended to be all-powerful, though the Incas for example had a quite equitable system of compulsory labour for public works and mines, allowing time for the participants to work their own fields to sustain their families.
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819), was a landmark ruling by the supreme court of the united states. the state of Maryland had tried to impede the running of the branch of the second bank of the united states by inflicting a tax on all notes of banks not chartered in Maryland. though the law, by its language, was generally applicable to all banks not chartered in Maryland, the second bank of the united states was the exclusive out-of-state bank then being in Maryland, and the law was acknowledged in the court's opinion as having precisely targeted the U.S. bank.
