The Necessary and Proper Clause is widely debated. From 1787 to 2010, this clause has had many Supreme Court cases. One important, and one of the first, case about the Necessary and Proper Clause is McCulloch v. Maryland. Several important things happened in this case. But, the real question is, "To what extent does the Necessary and Proper Clause grant a new power to Congress?" The answer to this complex question varies depending on who answers it. I believe the Necessary and Proper Clause grants power to a Congress to the extent where it affects any state's economic. Another important question about the Necessary and Proper Clause is, "What does “Proper” mean?" This answer also varies on the person, usually their political view(s). In this essay I will thoroughly answer these two important questions about the Necessary and Proper Clause. …show more content…
I believe that if Congress's decisions affects any state way that makes the state's economy worse, then it should not be permitted. In McCulloch v. Maryland, the National Bank taxed $15,00 per year, which is about $337,000 today. Maryland still had a thriving economy then, and $15,00 per year could have affected their economy, not in a good way. I also believe that if Congress is trying to put something in place, that does particularly need to be, then it is not Necessary and Proper. Another example in the McCulloch v. Maryland case is the controversy itself! The national bank Congress was trying to put in place. This Second Bank of the United States was not necessary, it would most likely not help the U.S.. Briefly, I believe if what Congress is trying to put in place under the Necessary and Proper Clause, then it should not worsen the economy and must be helpful to the posterity of the United
·Unless Congress adhered to a strict interpretation of the Constitution, critics argue, the central government might oppress the states and trample individual liberties, just as Parliament had done to the colonies
New Court rises as well as new found interpretation and modifications. However, the effect of the Commerce Clause has varied significantly depending on the Supreme Court 's interpretation. Moreover, making the Commerce power is limited. As shown in various cases; the Elastic Clause hold within power. Granted that gives a looser interpretation for congress to work with. In the court case Maryland Versus McCulloch, left Congress with the power to control the traffic as it crossed the state line giving congress power of Commerce. This court case expanded the power of the Commerce Clause vastly, but, not sufficient enough to hold more power against the Elastic Clause. Although, many might object claiming the commerce clause is more powerful the issue is the clause is restricted towards solely commerce. Once again the Elastic Clause states congress can do what they deem necessary and
The Constitution, however, does not specifically prohibit Congress from establishing a bank. The Marshall court found that the creation of a national bank would affect the welfare of the nation; therefore, the Constitutionality of creating the bank was legitimate. The power comes from the “necessary and proper” clause, which is listed under the powers of Congress, not its limits, in Article I section 9. Justice Marshall shows how the word “necessary” may have different meanings depending on the context of the sentence and by the intention of the person using the word. In Article I section 10 the phrase “absolutely necessary” is applied with stronger meaning regarding imports or exports, and is different than the word “necessary” used alone in this case, which was intended to mean indispensable by the framers of the Constitution.
Many people today argue that McCulloch v. Maryland is one of the most important Supreme Court cases in United States history. Three main points were made by Chief Justice Marshall in this case, and all of these points have become critical and necessary parts of the U.S. Government and how it functions. The first part of the Supreme Court’s ruling stated that Congress has implied powers under a specific part of the Constitution referred to as the Necessary and Proper Clause. The second section of the ruling determined that the laws of the United States are more significant and powerful than any state laws that conflict with them. The last element addressed by Chief Justice Marshall was that sovereignty of the Union lies with the people of the
...s on the Government’s power. It is the supreme law and any act that is inconsistent with it is null. The respondent’s argument that the Act “exceeds the authority of Congress” is a weak argument, which can be disproved by the Constitution, itself. Congress must be able to exercise stretching its powers in order to insure the safety of the economy.
With quick wit and an enlightening explanation of the Constitution, Jay Wexler’s The Odd Clauses did not disappoint. Covering the Constitution in a completely unique way, even the most simple-minded people in the world could walk away from this book understanding how complex the Constitution really is. Wexler takes a weird clause from the constitution, explains why it is odd, and then uses the clause to explain a whole segment of government. For example, Wexler uses the Weight and Measures Clause to explain the powers of Congress, and how they are to blame for crashing a $125 million probe into Mars.
Despite the downfall of the Federalist Party in the early nineteenth century, John Marshall continued to exert a strong Federalist influence on the government, which acted as a catalyst to ignite political controversy. In the McCullough vs. Maryland trial of 1819, Marshall deemed Maryland taxing the second bank of the United States as being unconstitutional, which gave even more power to the central government. (Doc D) Majority of the American population was against his ruling and refuted it because many people believed that having a strong central government was bad because if a bad decision was made, it would have affected the entire union, whereas if there was a strong state government, a bad decision would have just hurt the state. However, this was not the only time where the economy had failed in the early 1800’s. In 1816, John Randolph addressed congress and stated that it was unjust to tax the poo...
Unlike in the past, under the Articles of Confederation, the states were now led by the national government. The ultimate authority of the Constitution was brought out. The decision set the tone for all future court cases that tested the powers of the state v. the national government. After this case, two principles were brought out. First, the Constitution grants Congress implied powers to be used to carry out expressed powers to create a functional national government. Second, a state cannot impede upon valid constitutional exercises by the Federal government. For the states, the decision was signified a great loss of power. Matthew R. Connelly, author of Power in the Marshall Court: the Political Impact of McCulloch v. Maryland said, “ The decision also indicated to what extent a state could be considered sovereign. The opinion that a state could not tax a federal entity severely restricted a state’s author to tax to those situations explicitly enumerated in the Constitution. In general, the opinion demonstrated that while federal powers would be broadly interpreted, state powers would be significantly limited.” It forever changed the relationship between states and the national government. Without a doubt, the McCulloch v. Maryland case will continue to serve as a model for any future debates over the
Many people believe that the 18th Clause has been violated and misinterpreted by recent court decisions. The United States v. Comstock (2010), is an example of where the public was split whether or not that is was a just and constitutional decision. There have also been times where the general public believed the Necessary and Proper Clause was used lightly, turning down multiple bills in Congress. Creating an stance that Congress should have passed the bill because of its relation to the 18th Clause, instead of denying
These passages present a discussion about arguments concerning the Supreme Court's power. This is an important debate for America since the Supreme Court can alter the principles that by which we live by. The two positions argue whether or not the judiciary has too much power. Both viewpoints have valid claims warranting consideration; for example, evidence indicates that the judiciary has little power to implement their decisions. In contrast, opposing evidence suggests that despite this point, they still practice judicial review. While both sides of the issue have valid points, the claim that the judiciary has too much power is the strongest position, the position supported by a preponderance of the evidence cited in the passages. The most convincing and forceful reasons in support of this position are that
"Congress shall have the power...to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states."
In the years of 2013 through 2014, the Bond v. U.S. case, came before the U.S. Supreme Court in connection with the tenth amendment (Oyez). The tenth amendment states that, “The powers not given to the U.S. by the Constitution or prohibited by it to states are reserved to the states, or more subsequently, the people (Hart). The question and hand for the Supreme Court was, “Does Congress have the authority to enact a law that enforces a treat but goes beyond the scope of the treaty and intrudes on traditional state privileges?” This essay will explore events that occurred leading to the court case, the court’s decision, and the impact of the decision (Oyez).
Most people say it is Congress contributing good to society and government. Many may say that Necessary and Proper Clause can cause some loopholes in the government. The impact of the Necessary and Proper Clause has caused some controversies on the limitation of power it gives Congress. The Necessary and Proper Clause grant a new power to Congress by stretching its power, meeting new need , and Proper mean making the power suggested but not in the constitution.
The U.S. Constitution is a wonderful document that our forefathers put great thought, and effort into creating. It guides our government in the daily activities of running the United States. The United States has fought many wars to protect the inalienable rights we enjoy thanks to our forefathers writing this document. In this paper I will show the good and the bad of the Constitution. I will show how it is effective in today’s society, and what really needs to be amended to adapt to our ever changing society. Within the next few pages I will show the advantages, disadvantages, strengths and weaknesses of the U.S. Constitution. I will give an overview of the U.S. Constitution, and what is written with strength, and what is written without actual strength. I will review all the sections of the U.S. to include Federalism, what are its advantages and disadvantages, and how we can possibly improve them. The strengths and weaknesses of the three different branches of government, and how they can be improved. I will review how Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Elections work, and what their positive and negative impacts on our lives are.
This essay provides significant arguments that support the ideas put forward by Professor Lawrence’s lectures on the Constitution and the Legislative Branch of the U.S. Firstly, we will focus on the characteristics of Congress which make it one of the most influential establishments worldwide. We will then move on to a description of the three most relevant powers granted by the Constitution and weights their emphasis on American life today – such as the sovereignty over budget or taxation, the authority to oversight and the monopoly over laws. Finally, we will also depict why the legislative power is noteworthy above all else.