Mcculloch V. Maryland: Understanding The Constitutional Principle

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the issue of federal power and commerce. The case involved a dispute between James William McCulloch, a cashier at the Baltimore branch of the Second Bank of the United States, and the state of Maryland, which had imposed a tax on all banks within the state that were not chartered by the state legislature. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, ruled in favor of McCulloch, establishing that the Necessary and Proper Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives the federal government certain implied powers necessary for the exercise of its enumerated powers, and that the federal government is supreme over the states, restricting the states' ability to interfere with federal operations. This case set an important precedent regarding the division of powers between state and federal governments and the interpretation of congressional powers.

Explore related products

Constitutional Law: Principles and Polices (Aspen Treatise)

$97.38 $126.95

Constitutional Law: Principles and Practice

$129.99 $193.95

Constitutional Law: Principles and Policies (Aspen Treatise)

$117.28

Principles of Constitutional Law (Concise Hornbook Series)

$70 $70

Liberty, Order, and Justice: An Introduction to the Constitutional Principles of American Government

$11.44 $14.5

Constitutional Law: Structure and Principles

$17

The expansion of federal power

The McCulloch v. Maryland case of 1819 is considered a landmark Supreme Court decision that significantly expanded federal power. The case addressed the issue of federal power and commerce, specifically concerning the power of Congress to charter a bank and the broader issue of the division of powers between states and the federal government.

In 1816, Congress established the Second National Bank to control the amount of unregulated currency issued by state banks. Many states, including Maryland, questioned the constitutionality of the national bank. Maryland set a precedent by requiring taxes on all banks not chartered by the state, imposing a tax of $15,000 per year on the Second National Bank. James W. McCulloch, a cashier at the Baltimore branch of the bank, refused to pay the tax, arguing that a national bank was "necessary and proper" for Congress to establish.

The case went to the Supreme Court, where Chief Justice John Marshall handed down a significant ruling. Marshall ruled in favor of the federal government, concluding that the federal government had the right and power to establish a national bank and that states did not have the power to tax it. He stated that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy." Marshall's ruling was based on the interpretation of the "Necessary and Proper" Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which grants Congress the authority to carry out its enumerated powers as long as they are not forbidden by the Constitution.

The McCulloch v. Maryland decision set a precedent that expanded the constitutional powers of Congress. Legal scholar Nelson Lund has argued that the ruling "invited congressional overreach" and gave too much discretion to Congress. The case established the principle that the federal government is supreme over the states, and states' ability to interfere with the federal government is restricted. This decision has had a lasting impact on the interpretation of federal power and the relationship between the federal government and the states.

Congress's implied powers

The landmark Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) addressed the issue of federal power and commerce. The case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, specifically the Second National Bank of the United States, which was established in 1816 to help control the amount of unregulated currency issued by state banks. Many states, including Maryland, opposed the presence of branches of the National Bank within their borders, as they did not want the National Bank competing with their own banks.

Maryland imposed a tax on the bank, which James McCulloch, a cashier at the Baltimore branch, refused to pay. The state of Maryland then filed a suit against McCulloch in an effort to collect the taxes. The Supreme Court, however, ruled in favour of McCulloch and the federal government, concluding that the federal government had the right and power to set up a federal bank and that states did not have the power to tax the federal government. Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "the power to tax involves the power to destroy".

The Court's decision established that the "Necessary and Proper" Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives the U.S. federal government certain implied powers necessary and proper for the exercise of the powers enumerated explicitly in the Constitution. This clause is listed within the powers of Congress and not its limitations. The Court's interpretation of the Clause was that Congress could seek an objective while exercising its enumerated powers as long as that objective was not forbidden by the Constitution.

The McCulloch v. Maryland case is often cited as setting a precedent that gave too much discretion to Congress, expanding its constitutional powers. The case was one of the first and most important Supreme Court cases on federal power, and it continues to shape the understanding of Congress's implied powers.

The division of powers between state and federal government

The landmark US Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) addressed the issue of federal power and commerce, specifically the division of powers between state and federal governments. The case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, which sparked broader questions about the constitutionality of federal power over states' rights.

In 1816, Congress established the Second National Bank to control the amount of unregulated currency issued by state banks. Many states questioned the constitutionality of the national bank, and Maryland set a precedent by requiring taxes on all banks not chartered by the state. The State of Maryland approved legislation to impose taxes on the Second National Bank, which the bank refused to pay, arguing that the Constitution did not provide a textual commitment for the federal government to charter a bank.

The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, ruled in favor of the federal government, concluding that the federal government had the right and power to set up a federal bank and that states did not have the power to tax the federal government. Chief Justice John Marshall's ruling stated that the chartering of a bank was an implied power of the Constitution, under the "elastic clause," which granted Congress the authority to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution" the work of the federal government. Marshall also noted that the Necessary and Proper Clause is listed within the powers of Congress and not its limitations.

This case established the principle that the federal government is supreme over the states, and states' ability to interfere with the federal government is restricted. The ruling set a precedent that gave Congress broad discretion in interpreting its constitutional powers, and it has been cited in other federal systems, such as Australia, as a guideline for the relationship between federal and state governments.

Explore related products

Principles of Constitutional Structure (Concise Hornbook Series)

$52.5

Life, Liberty, & Political Happiness: Poverty-Grown Constitutional Principles

$21.95

Constitutional Law: Principles and Practice

$41.95 $199.95

Constitutional Law: Principles and Policy, Cases and Materials

$155 $230

Foreordained Failure: The Quest for a Constitutional Principle of Religious Freedom

$25.92 $77

State Constitutional Law: Cases and Principles (University Casebook Series)

$290

The constitutionality of the national bank

The landmark Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) addressed the issue of Federal power and commerce. The case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, specifically the Second National Bank of the United States, and sparked broader issues of the division of powers between state and the Federal Government.

The McCulloch v. Maryland case is significant because it established the constitutionality of the national bank and set a precedent for the expansion of Federal power. The case centred around a tax imposed by the state of Maryland on the Second National Bank, which the bank refused to pay, arguing that it was an instrument of the Federal Government and therefore not subject to state taxation.

The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Federal Government, concluding that the Federal Government had the right and power to establish a national bank and that states did not have the authority to tax the Federal Government. Chief Justice John Marshall's ruling stated that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy", implying that allowing states to tax national banks would give them the power to destroy those institutions.

The Court's decision was based on the interpretation of the "Necessary and Proper" Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which grants Congress the authority to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution" its enumerated powers. The Court held that the establishment of a national bank was an implied power of Congress, necessary for carrying out its duties, such as the power to lay and collect taxes, borrow money, and regulate commerce.

The McCulloch v. Maryland case set an important precedent for the interpretation of Federal power and the division of powers between the Federal Government and the states. It affirmed the supremacy of the Federal Government within its sphere of action and established that the Constitution grants Congress implied powers beyond those explicitly listed.

States' rights to tax the federal government

The landmark US Supreme Court case McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) addressed the issue of Federal power and commerce. It is one of the first and most important Supreme Court cases on federal power.

The case involved the power of Congress to charter a bank, which sparked the broader issue of the division of powers between states and the Federal Government. In 1816, Congress established the Second National Bank to control the amount of unregulated currency issued by state banks. Many states questioned the constitutionality of the national bank, and Maryland set a precedent by requiring taxes on all banks not chartered by the state. The State of Maryland approved legislation to impose a tax of $15,000 per year on the Second National Bank, which was chartered by Congress. James W. McCulloch, a Federal cashier at the Baltimore branch of the US bank, refused to pay the taxes imposed by the state.

Maryland filed a suit against McCulloch to collect the taxes. The Supreme Court, however, decided that the chartering of a bank was an implied power of the Constitution, under the "elastic clause," which granted Congress the authority to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution" the work of the Federal Government. The Court ruled that the Federal Government had the right and power to set up a Federal bank and that states did not have the power to tax the Federal Government. Chief Justice John Marshall ruled in favor of the Federal Government and concluded, "the power to tax involves the power to destroy."

The McCulloch v. Maryland case set a precedent that gave Congress broad discretion to expand its constitutional powers. The case was also influential outside the US, with the High Court of Australia citing it in the first substantial constitutional case presented before it in 1904.

Frequently asked questions