Ernesto Hernández Rodríguez
October 9, 2012
President Andrew Jackson Vetoes Bank Bill—July 10, 1832
President Andrew Jackson veto against the bank bill is truly a communication to Congress but it is also like a political manifesto. He states that the privileges possessed by the bank are unauthorized by the Constitution, subversive of the rights of the States, and dangerous to the liberties of the people.
In McCuloch v Maryland, the court turned to the "necessary" and "proper" clause which grants Congress enumerated powers which include the power to regulate collect taxes. President Jackson explains the necessity in regards to the functions that the bank is trying to fulfill: The "degree of its necessity,” involving all the details of a banking institution, is a question exclusively for legislative consideration (Jackson). It is not question for the judicial department. As stated in the Constitution the one that has the job to determine what is "necessary" in cases where the law is not prohibited or really calculated, is the legislative department.
President Jackson gives major points in describing the reason why the bank was not "necessary" and "proper". At first the bank was established by Congress because of the power to determine what was necessary. But in the years 1816 and 1832 Congress proposed and took away from their successors the power of establishing banks for twenty years and then for fifteen years more. This contradiction that Congress did of bartering away or divesting itself from the powers is unconstitutional because of using discretion upon itself; Congress was limiting the discretion of their successors. And the Constitution does not grant Congress the power to inflict this in itself.
The bank affected the rights of the Sates in a subversive way. It gave up, surrendered the right of the States to tax the banking institutions. Under the operation of this act resident stockholders and citizens would be...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document