ipl-logo

Supreme In Mcculloch Analysis

468 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Federalism vs anti-federalism

The states righters of Marshall’s era, much like the antifederalists of the previous era, believed that the Constitution served as a generic limit on federal power while the Tenth Amendment served as a general grant of, near, limitless discretionary power for the states. The antifederalists, chiefly those who supported the ‘league’ concept of the Articles of Confederation, feared a strong central government that wielded discretion and its accompanying power. In the same way the state righters desired state independence and discretion, not to be infringed upon by a unified Federal government. This mindset lead to, on multiple occasions, conflicts in which states challenged Federal supremacy. These conflicts manifested themselves in Supreme …show more content…

Marshall addresses this issue when he argues, “It is the government of all; its powers are delegated by all; it represents all, and acts for all.” Marshall makes it clear that the Union, governed by the Federal government, which was established by the People, has dominion over all the enumerated states. That the Federal Constitution serves to, “necessarily bind its component parts.” According to Marshall, the Union is no longer a loosely tied league of independent states, it is now a Country of unified, but uniquely separate, entities; it is a Federalist republic. In Gibbons, Marshall continues this same logic as he asserts the supremacy of the Federal over the states; Marshall writes, “the acts of congress… are supreme; and the law of the state… must yield to it,” Though the states righters believed the states to win out in conflicts of state and federal shared powers, Marshall, by means of the Constitution, makes it clear that the unified government over the Union is supreme as a body with more widespread will granted by the unified people rather than by the individual state

Show More
Related
258 Words | 2 Pages

John Marshall altered the Court’s position within the constitutional system and engaged a dynamic battle to sustain the federal authority over the interstate business and in dealings between the states and the federal government. This he did during the thirty-four years he was the chief justice and to date is a legacy in the Court’s history. Marbury v. Madison (1803) marked the commencing of Marshall’s record of achievement in which he justified the Court’s supremacy of judicial review - the rule to assess the constitutionality of state laws and other actions of the government - and put down the foundations of national constitutional jurisprudence. In Fletcher v. Peck (1810), Marshall alleged that a land grant was a contract that a government

Read More
421 Words | 2 Pages

Every state in the nation was connected by waterways and marshall made his point that without the power of congress, commerce cannot be carried out through the states. If states were allowed that control , then they would have their own rules about commerce, therefore, commerce would have been impossible and producers and consumers would not be able to sell or buy products under uniform law. Hence, it is why the articles of confederation were put to an end in order to prevent states from eventually holding the power to control interstate

Read More
1511 Words | 7 Pages

Lectures Lecture 14 “Questions to Consider #1”: Why did the Anti Federalists object so strongly to the Preamble to the Constitution? The Anti-Federalists objected so strongly to Preamble to the Constitution due to the fact the Preamble establishes powers for the three branches of government, states’ relations, mode of amendment, debts, national supremacy, oath of office, and amendment ratification. This group felts as though when the federalists wanting to create a strong central government would not be strong enough if the Preamble was not put into place. Lecture 14 states, “Anti-federalists suspicious of central power fought the new Constitution tenaciously…..

Read More
646 Words | 3 Pages

In both the McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden cases, John Marshall asserted the power of judicial review, and legitimatized the Supreme Court within the national government. The Marshall Court, over the span of thirty years, managed to influence the life of every American by aiding in the development of the judicial branch and establishing a boundary between the state and national government. John Marshall’s Supreme Court cases shaped how the government is organized today. He strongly believed in Federalism, and that the national government should be sovereign, rather than the states. The Supreme Court under John

Read More
218 Words | 1 Pages

2. Madison argues in Federalist Paper 45 that the union would be most beneficial during times of war and danger. States would concern themselves with ordinary causes of affairs, concerns of life, liberty, and property. How can we effectively balance this school of thought with the efficiencies that standardization

Read More
628 Words | 3 Pages

“Richard Henry Lee’s Objection to the Constitution” and James Madison’s “The Federalist No. 51” contend about the positive and negative effects of the Constitution. Both essays are important documents for early American history, and both contain valid points. James Madison, however, presents the better argument with his diplomatic, content, and logical approach. “The Federalist No. 51” begins with a question about how America can properly divide government power (Madison 1). Madison believes the Constitution is the answer because it gives the foundations and tools to keeping the power of the government for the people.

Read More
343 Words | 2 Pages

James Madison’s Federalist 10 was written amid criticisms that a republican form of government had never been successful on a large scale. Madison’s argument was that a well-constructed union could control factions. He argued that in order to control factions from their causes, we would need to either give up liberty or free thought. Since we cannot infringe upon these two natural rights, we must move on to controlling the effects. A republic, Madison argues, would be able to do this because the people choose the representatives, and they choose representatives who they feel best represent their opinions.

Read More
463 Words | 2 Pages

First of all, Federalism in the constitution helps guard against tyranny. “The different governments will

Read More
812 Words | 4 Pages

Marshall used common ideas to hold off on granting the mandamus while simultaneously criticizing the branches of government. Marshall begins his argument by accommodating the known power of the executive and legislative branches as well as individual rights. He then transitioned towards the rights of individuals and the Constitution. Finally, the divinity of the Constitution allowed for a distinction between government power and individual rights, which provided the Supreme Court’s final decision in the

Read More
539 Words | 3 Pages

John Marshall supports the cooperative view of federalism, in that he believes that the state and federal government share powers, but that the national government is supreme. From Marshall’s opinion in McCulloch v. Maryland, it is clear the he supports a broad reading of the Necessary and Proper Clause and the Supremacy Clause. In the instance with the Motor Voter law, Marshall would reject the state of Illinois's argument that the statute interferes with states rights, because Marshall hold a truism interpretation of the Tenth Amendment. This belief is based on the idea that the state's only have what is not delegated to the national government and what is not restricted to them. Marshal does not believe that there is a separate sphere reserved

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is

Read More
622 Words | 3 Pages

The Democratic and Republican parties will find little agreement on the issue of federalism and the limits of federal power for states. Democrats are persuaded that the rights and competencies of states should be expanded; The Republicans assume that more noteworthy limitations ought to be set on the federal power, favoring the centralization of political forces in the United States

Read More
495 Words | 2 Pages

Article VI of the Constitution contains the Supremacy Clause, which states that federal law is supreme to state law. The Supremacy Clause was added to the Constitution to give the federal government power over the states. Under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government

Read More
536 Words | 3 Pages

The Tenth Amendment Reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the State, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” James Madison wrote this amendment to limit the power of central government, by stating that the federal government only possessed powers explicitly delegated to it. This effectively allowed states to assume the powers not granted to the United States, thus making the states more influential. The Tenth Amendment grants more powers to the states, which

Read More
574 Words | 3 Pages

During the early stages of our country, the individual states felt that creating a central government was going to produce a government with absolute power. This led some of the representatives to dispute the idea, as they did not want to lose the power they already possessed. Edmund Burke said: “All persons possessing any portion of power ought to be strongly and awfully impressed with an idea that they act in trust: and that they are to account for their conduct in that trust to the one great Master, Author, and Founder of society… Power to be legitimate must be according to that eternal, immutable law, in which will and reason are the same.” Between the creation of the Constitution and the Civil War, there was a period of implementation.

Read More

More about Supreme In Mcculloch Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document