promotion image of download ymail app
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

In McCulloch, can someone briefly describe what decision was reached, the reasons for that decision, and the..?

relationship to federalism?

Also for Gibbons v. Ogden

1 Answer

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Facts of the Case:

    In 1816, Congress chartered The Second Bank of the United States. In 1818, the state of Maryland passed legislation to impose taxes on the bank. James W. McCulloch, the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the bank, refused to pay the tax.


    The case presented two questions: Did Congress have the authority to establish the bank? Did the Maryland law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers?


    In a unanimous decision, the Court held that Congress had the power to incorporate the bank and that Maryland could not tax instruments of the national government employed in the execution of constitutional powers. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Marshall noted that Congress possessed unenumerated powers not explicitly outlined in the Constitution. Marshall also held that while the states retained the power of taxation, "the constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof are supreme. . .they control the constitution and laws of the respective states, and cannot be controlled by them."


    Basically, this allowed the existence of a national bank, or currently, as we know it, the Fed. The SC came to the decision that even though the constitution didn't "allow" for it, because the government was given powers to tax, declare war, etc. , that they MUST be given the means to do it. That leaves us with our current day situation where The Fed has too much control over our economy--as we can see, they can make it or BREAK it.

    In Gibbons v. Ogden--it went a step further.

    Constitution before the Supreme Court decided a case related to the clause empowering Congress to regulate interstate and foreign commerce (Article I, sec. 8). In Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), Chief Justice John Marshall delivered an opinion that was a classic statement of nationalism. Over the years, it became a source of extensive authority for Congress to address new problems in the regulation of the national economy. Judges and lawyers would analyze it to explain the distribution of powers between nation and states in the American federal system (see Federalism).


    Again, this was just an expansion of federal powers and control over the states.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.