What were the opposing arguments in McCulloch v Maryland?

Answer 1

According to Maryland, Congress violated the Tenth Amendment by chartering the Second Bank of the United States in Baltimore in 1817. The Tenth Amendment states:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Maryland believed Congress had infringed the State's right of sovereign authority because the Constitution didn't explicitly mention banking; therefore, they reasoned, chartering banks was a reserved right under the Constitution. Maryland decided to exercise their authority by passing a law taxing all banks not chartered in Maryland.

In the opinion of the Court, Chief Justice Marshall held that the Taxing and Spending Clause implied a need for handling revenue (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1) and the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18) allowed Congress to establish a national bank in order to facilitate the exercise of legitimate constitutional powers. Further, Marshall held that the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2) elevated federal law above state law when the two are in conflict, and prohibited the states from interfering with government activity.

Case Citation:

McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)