Chief Justice
John Marshall................Federalist Party
Associate Justices
Bushrod Washington.....Federalist Party
William Johnson............Democratic-Republican
Henry B. Livingston.......Democratic-Republican
Thomas Todd................Democratic-Republican
Gabrielle Duvall.............Democratic-Republican
Joseph Story.................Democratic-Republican
Case Citation:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
James McCulloch, head of the Baltimore Branch of the Second Bank of the United States, was originally sued by John James, a citizen, who took action as an intervenor (a party without a direct interest who has a legitimate stake in the outcome of the case). because he hoped to collect a portion of the proceeds from the Second National Bank's delinquent taxes. He won a judgment in Baltimore County Court. McCulloch was the nominal respondent for the US government.
The case was eventually appealed to the US Supreme Court.
Representing the State of Maryland
William Wirt, US Attorney General
Daniel Webster, attorney arguing for US government
William Pinkney, attorney arguing for US government
Representing the US Federal Government
Luther Martin, Maryland State Attorney General
Joseph Hopkinson, attorney arguing for the State of Maryland
Walter Jones, attorney arguing for the State of Maryland
US Supreme Court Justices
Chief Justice John Marshall
Justice Bushrod Washington
Justice William Johnson
Justice Henry B. Livingston
Justice Thomas Todd
Justice Gabriel Duvall
Justice Joseph Story
Case Citation:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
Fourth Chief Justice John Marshall presided over the Supreme Court and wrote the opinion for McCulloch v. Maryland,(1819). Marshall lead the Court from 1801-1835.
Case Citation:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
James McCulloch, head of the Baltimore Branch of the Second Bank of the United States, was originally sued by John James, a citizen, who took action as an intervenor (a party without a direct interest who has a legitimate stake in the outcome of the case). because he hoped to collect a portion of the proceeds from the Second National Bank's delinquent taxes. He won a judgment in Baltimore County Court. McCulloch was the nominal respondent for the US government.
The case was eventually appealed to the US Supreme Court.
Representing the State of Maryland
William Wirt, US Attorney General
Daniel Webster, attorney arguing for US government
William Pinkney, attorney arguing for US government
Representing the US Federal Government
Luther Martin, Maryland State Attorney General
Joseph Hopkinson, attorney arguing for the State of Maryland
Walter Jones, attorney arguing for the State of Maryland
US Supreme Court Justices
Chief Justice John Marshall
Justice Bushrod Washington
Justice William Johnson
Justice Henry B. Livingston
Justice Thomas Todd
Justice Gabriel Duvall
Justice Joseph Story
Case Citation:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
James W. McCulloch, Cashier of the Baltimore, Maryland, branch of the Second Bank of the United States, was the nominal "plaintiff in error" who petitioned the US Supreme Court in McCulloch v. Maryland, (1819). McCulloch was a proxy for the federal government in a dispute over Congress' constitutional authority to charter a national bank because he refused to pay taxes the State of Maryland attempted to impose on any bank not chartered by the State.
The case was actually a political power struggle between the state and federal governments.
Case Citation:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
Fourth Chief Justice, John Marshall
They both gave more power to the federal government instead of the individual states
the McChulloch vs. Maryland court case
Some may claim most of Chief Justice Marshall's opinions involved a "loose" interpretation of the Constitution; however, the solution to the problem involved invoking specific clauses (Article I, Section 8, Necessary and Proper Clause; Article VI, Supremacy Clause) that were clearly intended for application when federal and state governments had a conflict in power. In my opinion, the decision in McCulloch v. Maryland was well-reasoned and fell within the original intent of the Framers; therefore, I would say this is not an example of a "loose" interpretation (one isn't concretely supported).Counter OpinionHe made a loose interpretation by basing his decision in part on implied powers that naturally arose from the exercise of enumerated constitutional powers awarded to the Legislative branch in Article I, Section 8.Case Citation:McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
what are the three major reason for case attrrition
Presumably you mean the border-states - Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland and Delaware. These were deeply-divided states that narrowly voted against joining the Confederacy. In the case of Missouri, inter-sectional violence continued throughout the war. In the case of Kentucky, a Confederate assembly was set up by an invading Confederate army, but it collapsed after they retreated. In the case of Maryland, Lincoln had (illegally) jailed the state's pro-Southern leaders, but so much Confederate sentiment remained that his assassination was actually planned in a Maryland boarding-house. Still, all four states did stay loyal, and this was a big factor in eventual Northern victory.
James McCulloch was cashier and head of the Baltimore, Maryland, branch of The Second Bank of the United States who refused to pay a new tax the State of Maryland attempted to impose on the bank. McCulloch was the nominal defendant in Maryland's case against the federal government in the state courts, and the petitioner in the US Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland, (1819).Case Citation:McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)For more information about McCulloch v. Maryland, see Related Links, below.
McCulloch v. Maryland prevented states from taxing the federal government. The state of Maryland was trying to impose a tax on all bank notes of banks not chartered in Maryland. At the time, the only bank of this sort in Maryland was the Second Bank of the United States.
James Monroe
McCulloch v. Maryland settled that the National Bank was constitutional. Also it settled that Maryland does not have the power to tax a institution created by congress.
vs. MARYLAND
black people
McCulloch v. Maryland.An example of national supremacy clause can be seen in the case McCulloch v. Maryland.
Jake Henderson was here :)
How did the Supreme Court’s ruling in McCulloch v. Maryland strengthen the federal government ?The court case known as McCulloch v. Maryland of March 6, 1819, was a seminal Supreme Court Case that affirmed the right of implied powers, that there were powers that the federal government had that were not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, but were implied by it.
true
McCulloch v. Maryland
McCulloch vs Maryland