0
Most of the expressed powers of Congress are found in Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution. While the powers are clearly stated, custom and usage has changed some of the powers. The last clause of that Article, the so-called elastic clause (or necessary and proper clause), is responsible for the modification of the powers of Congress. The clause gives Congress the right to "make all laws necessary and proper." It stretches the power of Congress.
But, what do the words necessary and proper mean? The issue became part of the "strict" versus "loose" interpretation of the Constitution.
In 1819 the Supreme Court addressed this problem in McCulloch v Maryland. The state of Maryland had attempted to impede operation of a branch of the Second Bank of the United States by imposing a tax on all notes of banks not chartered in Maryland. The Court ruled in favor of a loose interpretation. This decision gave the Congress the power to make any laws that were necessary to carry out its expressed powers, as the Court declared that state action could not impede the constitutional power of the Federal government. It was argued that if the state was permitted to tax any part of the Federal government, it could tax it out of existence.
Case Citation:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Judy
Fran
LaoIn McCulloch v. Maryland, the U. S. Supreme Court declared that the states could not tax the federal government. This was significant to Federalism because it provided that actions taken by a state may not impede the constitutional exercise of power by the federal government.
In McCulloch v. Maryland, (1819), the Supreme Court concluded that Congress had the right to establish a national bank as an implied power of Article I, Section 8, because the bank was being used to further Congress' constitutional authority to tax and distribute funds. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, which preceded the US Constitution, the Constitution does not prohibit the exercise of implied powers necessary to assist in carrying out constitutional mandates.
The Court also prevented states from taxing the federal government, by declaring Maryland's legislation unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause. Chief Justice Marshall stated that the state's power to tax was the "power to destroy" competition by taxing it out of existence, which was being used unconstitutionally against the federal government.
Both issues strengthened the position of the federal government relative to the states, and allowed the branches of government greater latitude in how they exercised their constitutional powers.
Case Citation:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
For more information on McCulloch v. Maryland, see Related Questions, below.
The Court ruled that the federal government had the implied power under the Constitution to establish a national bank. Then the Court held that Maryland could not tax the bank, because the tax improperly infringed upon federal power. The case established two bedrock principles: First, that the federal government had implied powers to carry out its constitutional rights and, second, that the states were inferior to the federal government when it came to this power
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What did the supreme court case McCulloch v Maryland settle?
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.
The Supreme Court case that most clearly contributed to the start of the Civil War was?
McCulloch v. Maryland.
Which Supreme Court case prevented states from taxing the federal government?
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.
What role did James McCulloch play in McCulloch v. Maryland 1819?
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.
Which court hears cases that have national significance?
Supreme Court of the United States
