McCulloch v. Maryland
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:38:03 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  McCulloch v. Maryland
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: The ruling was...
#1
Constitutionally sound
 
#2
Constitutionally unsound
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 26

Author Topic: McCulloch v. Maryland  (Read 5989 times)
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 05, 2005, 09:08:58 PM »

McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819)
Logged
Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2005, 09:54:44 PM »

The decision was unsound.

John Marshall contended that a bank was "necessary and proper to carry into execution several of the enumerated powers, such as the powers of levying and collecting taxes throughout this widely-extended empire; of paying the public debts, both in the United States and in foreign countries; of borrowing money, at home and abroad; of regulating commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states; of raising and supporting armies and a navy; and of carrying on war." The connection became more and more remote as Marshall listed the powers that supposedly authorized the creation of a national bank.

Such a broad reading of the necessary and proper clause is quite dangerous. I agree that Congress should be given some latitude in this regard; the word "necessary" need not be construed too stringently. But be that as it may, a law must bear (to use Justice Thomas' words) an "obvious, simple, and direct relation" to the exercise of an enumerated power, in order to come within the scope of the elastic clause. No such relationship exists with any of the powers cited by Marshall. I fail to see how the power of raising armies, for example, is related to the creation of a bank.

Indeed, the constitutional convention specifically rejected the idea that Congress should have the power to establish a bank. James Madison proposed that Congress should be allowed to "grant charters of incorporation where the interest of the United States might require." In response, Rufus King said that "the establishment of a bank ... has been a subject of contention," and that granting Congress this power might alienate some supporters of ratification. No doubt at least partly swayed by King's reasoning, the convention rejected the proposal.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,704
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2007, 07:16:19 PM »

Currently being discussed in my Constitutional Law class.

I vote sound.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2007, 07:30:49 AM »

The power to tax is the power to destroy.  Sound and represents the supremacy of the federal government.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2007, 06:48:37 PM »

This is traitorous sedition.  This sort of reasoning is the cause of our astronomical national trade deficit today.  Free traitors practice their lunatic policies with communist govts. that dominate the guidelines of preference.  The govt. must ensure sound credit for the nation.  What was the use of Philadelphia Convention, but to bring the country a more financially sound system of cooperation under federal law.

I'm certain all the Presidents through Hoover would have agreed with "the necessary and proper clause" of obligation to credit although to differing degrees.

The first mistake was the overthrow of John Q with Ol' Hick in '29.  Natl. bank credit and protection would have ended slavery on a dime without a war because the South would have been stripped of their resources.  From '29 to '61 the nation was acting under the impression of the Articles of Confederation with no authority to make the people recognize ethical financial obligations.

And please believe that the Civil War is the original cause of inflationary policy in this country.  The so-called Greenback has scarcely been on par with gold, and now we can forget about this ideal until Gold becomes our standard bearer again.

Unite our system with Britain!

Ah, the decision was that the state could not tax the national bank.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2007, 09:31:35 PM »

Completely sound. Imagine if States' Rights fanatics started taxing every federal institution 1000000%.
Logged
Peter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,030


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -7.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 19, 2007, 06:21:15 PM »

It wouldn't be States Rights then, it would be States Wrongs
Logged
Anti Democrat Democrat Club
SawxDem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,094
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2015, 03:32:55 PM »

what
Logged
Dereich
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2015, 03:34:50 PM »

Its called the Supremacy Clause J.J. Glad to see you made it through elementary buddy. Who are you John Marshall's alterego? Im sure you've already heard about another form of Supremacy in the Dred Scott decision. Still feel superior, Big Guy? Wink

This is traitorous sedition.  This sort of reasoning is the cause of our astronomical national trade deficit today.  Free traitors practice their lunatic policies with communist govts. that dominate the guidelines of preference.  The govt. must ensure sound credit for the nation.  What was the use of Philadelphia Convention, but to bring the country a more financially sound system of cooperation under federal law.

I'm certain all the Presidents through Hoover would have agreed with "the necessary and proper clause" of obligation to credit although to differing degrees.

The first mistake was the overthrow of John Q with Ol' Hick in '29.  Natl. bank credit and protection would have ended slavery on a dime without a war because the South would have been stripped of their resources.  From '29 to '61 the nation was acting under the impression of the Articles of Confederation with no authority to make the people recognize ethical financial obligations.

And please believe that the Civil War is the original cause of inflationary policy in this country.  The so-called Greenback has scarcely been on par with gold, and now we can forget about this ideal until Gold becomes our standard bearer again.

Unite our system with Britain!

Ah, the decision was that the state could not tax the national bank.

It's been SEVEN YEARS since he responded to you. At some point you need to let these things go.
Logged
Türkisblau
H_Wallace
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2015, 04:28:15 PM »

This is amazing. I guess SirGallantry just couldn't live with J. J. getting in the last word.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.033 seconds with 14 queries.