Inverse marking and the Person-Case Constraint (PCC) are both types of person hierarchy effects that hold between arguments. Drawing on data from four Indigenous languages of North America, I observe that all four widely recognized varieties of the PCC have parallels in inverse marking. This similarity in the attested patterns suggests that the two phenomena should receive a unified treatment. I argue that the core of the phenomena are the same and that there are two factors that yield the surface differences between patterns of inverse marking and the PCC. The first factor is the height of the agreement probe that is implicated in the hierarchy effect, leading to a difference in whether it is the subject and object that are involved in the restriction or the two objects in a ditransitive. I propose that the second factor that differentiates the two types of hierarchy effects is the type of repair strategies that are available to remedy unacceptable person combinations, with inverse marking itself representing a repair. I argue for a unified account of the two phenomena drawing on Deal's (2021) interaction and satisfaction account of the PCC, and I demonstrate that this style of analysis has greater empirical coverage than competitors. Finally, I show that this account of the parallels and differences between inverse marking and the PCC predicts the existence of two additional types of person hierarchy effects, both of which are attested.