Question

How would you describe and explain the significance of McCulloch V. Maryland?

Answer 1

Hint: U.S. landmark was McCulloch v. Maryland, 316 (1819). The decision of the Supreme Court that established the U.S. scope. The legislative power of Congress and how it applies to the powers of state legislatures in America.

Complete answer: The McCulloch conflict concerned the validity of the national bank and a tax levied on it by the state of Maryland. McCulloch was described as the most significant decision of the Supreme Court in American history as it defined the extent of the powers of Congress and delineated the relationship between the federal government and the state. From the moment of ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788, the creation of a national bank for the United States was a source of great public controversy. Alexander Hamilton suggested the establishment of a national bank to regulate the currency of the United States and deal with national economic problems. Washington's Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, however, strongly opposed the creation of the bank, fearing that it would usurp the power of the various states and concentrate it on the central federal government to a dangerous degree. With a 20-year charter, Congress created the First Bank of the United States in 1791, but the issue continued to provoke controversy. The Federalist Party was eventually formed by those who supported Hamilton's vision of a strong central government, while the Democratic-Republican Party was formed by those who opposed him and supported Jefferson's vision of a decentralised government that focused on state rights. Chief Justice Marshall supported his conclusion with four main arguments: Firstly, he argued that historical practice established Congress's power to create the Bank. Secondly, Marshall rebutted the argument that states retain ultimate sovereignty because they ratified the constitution, Marshall contended that it was the people who ratified the Constitution and thus the people, not the states, who are sovereign. Thirdly, under Article I, Marshall addressed the scope of congressional powers. Before addressing the Necessary and Proper Clause, the Court broadly described the authority of Congress. Fourth, by invoking the Necessary and Proper Clause, which allows Congress to seek an objective while exercising its enumerated powers as long as that objective is not prohibited by the Constitution, Marshall textually supported his view.

Note: While Marshall rejected the clause of states' rights in the Tenth Amendment, arguing that it did not contain the term "expressly," there was controversy about the authority of the amendment being violated by the ruling, unlike the Articles of Confederation, which were replaced by the Constitution.