Mcculloch Vs. Maryland Case Study

McCulloch v. Maryland
4 Wheat. 316 (1819)

FACTS: The Second Bank of the United States was chartered in 1816, amid much opposition from the states. However, following many financial disasters throughout the nation, eight states, including Maryland, passed statutes restricting the “activities of the Bank or imposing heavy burdens on it.” The state of Maryland impeded the operations of the Bank by imposing a significant paper tax on all notes not chartered by the state. McCulloch, the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the Bank brought the case to the trial court which decided against him. The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.
ISSUE: Does Congress have the authority to instate a bank, and if so, does the state of Maryland
All things in this country are executed according to the Constitution. The Bank underwent heavy criticism and evaluation before becoming law by Congress. Although Maryland has contested that sovereignty of their state, the Constitution is a social contract formulated by convention. This contract comes from the people of the states, and bounds the states together under one union. Thus, the federal government is based on the consent of the citizens of the nation.
Congress has a set of enumerated powers under the Constitution. However, if all of the powers of the branches of the federal government were listed in detail, the document would become obscure and hard to understand. Thus, it is understood that Congress may also act upon implied powers provided by the Constitution. As Congress does have the authority to both regulate commerce, borrow money, and tax the people, there exists the implied right of the incorporation of a bank.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 states that Congress has the power to pass laws that fall within the bounds of the Constitution and are appropriate for the nation. The creation of a bank by Congress is not forbidden by the Constitution and is thus legal under the implied
According to Article VI, Clause 2, the Constitution and federal laws are the supreme law of the land. Although Maryland is a sovereign state entitled to its own state laws, all these laws are valid assuming that they fall under the jurisdiction of the federal laws. If any law is in breach of the federal laws, it is void. The taxation of the branch by Maryland is a direct threat to the federal law that instated the bank. Thus, the taxation of the branch by Maryland must cease as continuing would hinder the bank from existing.
DECISION: Reversed.
RULE: The Constitution of the United States cannot possibly list all the enumerated powers of the branches of government, and thus Congress has the authority to exercise implied powers which fall within the legal bounds of the document. Therefore, according to Article I, Section 8, Clause 18, Congress has the authority to incorporate a bank. The state of Maryland does not have the right to tax this federal institution, as doing so would harm and hinder the operations of the bank. This would be a violation of Article VI, Clause 2, where it is stated that the federal laws are the supreme laws of the land.
DISSENTING: