McCulloch v. Maryland 1819

Provision of the US Constitution at Issue

Article 1 Section 8 — Necessary and Proper Clause Broad v. Narrow intrepretation

Government Action or Statute in Dispute

Did Congress have the authority to establish the bank? Did the Maryland law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers?

Outcome

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.

Major Doctrine or Doctrines

Marshall developed a doctrine that states may not retard, impede or burden constitutional laws enacted by congress — The power to tax, is the power to destroy — This falls under burdening constitutional laws enacted by Congress — The Maryland tax is a punitive tax on a federal instrumentality, and is therefore unconstitutional. — This is a good example of court saying "yes" and legitimizing a controversial act of the federal government — Very important action for the court to say yes — The state's rights argument had been about popular sovereignty — Popular sovereignty was then used to justify the powers of the national government; people forming the national government is the true reciprocity of the sovereignty of the people, and thus had precedent over state sovereignty — Also important because Maryland asking the court to strike down an act of congress as unconstitutional concedes that court has power of judicial review

Reasoning of the Majority

Marshall's Opinion: Marshal first needed to assert that it was proper for the court to decide this case because the court was the agency of government that was intended to resolve disputes between the states and federal government Supreme Court is the proper body to decide the dispute Marshall then analyzed the nature of the Constitution: The national government is not created by sovereign states people are source of sovereignty, the sovereignty is vested in states and federal government National government is supreme within its sphere of action As a sovereign nation its powers must be broadly construed This is a Constitution is meant to endure, as a result, it should be adaptable to changing times and changing circumstances so it is entirely appropriate to interpret the necessary and proper clause in an according fashion The necessary and proper clause is an addition to the powers of congress, not a limit Demonstrated by the logical construction of the Constitution Look at context of section in question; necessary and proper clause is placed with the enumerated powers of congress in art 1 sec 8, not with the limits in articles 1 sec 9 The creation of the Second bank is an appropriate measure to carry out Congress' enumerated monetary powers

Alternative Solution

Maryland argued that the tax was perfectly constitution, because they states are co-equal sovereignties with federal government, and that they have the power to tax people, including the federal government. Marshall could have upheld this opinion that the states and the federal government were co-equal sovereignties. Second argument: The second bank was unconstitutional as it was not a necessary and proper institution to carry out the power of congress, and is therefore unconstitutional — Maryland was pushing for a narrow interpretation of the clause. Marshall could have agreed with the narrow interpretation of the Constitution.

Facts

The First Bank of the United States had been Chartered for 20 years, Congress then chartered the Second Bank In 1816. 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. He was prosecuted and convicted. Maryland did not raise 11th amendment, willingly appeared before court-wanted the court to uphold the Maryland tax