0
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Coach
Ezra
DevinAdd your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What were the long term consequences of the ruling of McCulloch v Maryland?
McCulloch v. Maryland effectively destroyed the concept of "State's rights". It also paved the way for the national or federal banking system. It made a huge directional sweep away from limited national government. Previous conservative judicial restraint gave way to the more radical judicial activism.
What type of opinion is written to make a point that was not made in the opinion of the Court?
A Justice may write a concurring opinion, which sometimes says "concurring in judgment only," if he or she votes with the majority but either disagrees with the logic used to arrive at the decision; agrees with part of the decision, but disagrees with another part; or wants to address relevant points not made in the majority opinion. When there is a clear majority opinion joined by a substantial number of Justices, concurring opinions can help strengthen a case and may be cited as precedent in future cases.Sometimes the court issues so many separate opinions that whichever opinion is joined by the most justices is referred to as a plurality, rather than a majority. One recent example of a decision holding a plurality opinion is that of Baez et al., v. Rees (2008), where Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kennedy and Alito signed one opinion, and Justice Stevens wrote a separate concurring opinion, as did Justices Scalia, Breyer, and Thomas (Scalia also joined Thomas' concurrence). Justice Ginsberg wrote a dissenting opinion in which Justice Souter joined.There are also a number of cases where members of the majority each wrote a concurring opinion, without creating a unified majority or plurality opinion, as well as cases where the court decision was released without the signature of any justice, in an anonymous fashion. This latter form is known as a per curiamdecision. Bush v. Gore (2000) is a recent example. Cases decided per curiam do not create a precedent that can be cited in future litigation.Plurality and per curiam decisions tend to create confusion as to how a federal or constitutional law is to be interpreted.
What amendment did McCulloch v Maryland?
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.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.Additional Information:This case was instrumental in providing clarification to what the "implied powers" of Congress (here, at a federal level) were, and as a show of the authority structure of the states versus the federal government.In John Marshall's decision, he declared that outside of those powers immediately declared Congress, there are unwritten powers entitled them to provide for the continuity of the United States -- this hearkens to the "necessary and proper clause" of the Constitution.Marshall also declared that states did not have the right to impinge upon any law created Constitutionally by Congress, as they had done by placing a tax upon Maryland-based federal banks.Case Citation:McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)For more information on McCulloch v. Maryland, see Related Questions, below.
When was McCulloch v. Maryland decided?
The US Supreme Court handed down a decision on McCullochon March 6, 1819.Congress had chartered The Second National Bank in 1816. In 1818, the State of Maryland passed a law imposing taxes on any bank not chartered by the state legislature. The Court held Congress had a right to establish a bank for its transactional needs under the "Necessary and Proper" clause. Further, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional for states to tax the federal government under Article VI, Section 2 (the Supremacy Clause).Argued: February 22, 1819Decided: March 6, 1819Case Citation:McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 US 316 (1819)
What is a major difference between a majority opinion and dissenting opinion issued by the supreme court?
A majority opinion explains the reasoning behind the courts ruling while a dissenting opinion explains a disagreement with the courts ruling
