Mcculloch Vs. Maryland: Compare And Contrast Essay

931 Words4 Pages
Edwards and Wattenberg define Federalism as, “a way of organizing a nation so that two or more levels of government share formal authority over the same area and people. (Edwards and Wattenburg,70)” When the United States first started to form a central government their objective was to never allow for a dominating power to take over the country again. To do so they created a division of power and made it possible for states and more so the “people” the right to have more of an impact on government. Or so were their intended thoughts when creating the constitution and the branches. In doing so their focus constrained national government but left a loose string as to what the states and their constitutions could do. An example of the Federal system gaining power over the states would be McCulloch v Maryland. A Landmark Supreme Court case that defined whether the federal government has inherent powers and whether the state has the right to tax a federal entity. This brought forth the idea of the Necessary and Proper…show more content…
When McCulloch refused the state decided to file a lawsuit against him. In McCulloch’s case, he lost on the district level to the state of Maryland and he lost his appeal. It was only after this that it was brought before the court for review. It was only then that the court decided to go with McCulloch because the act of taxing a federal entity goes against that of the Constitution and although states have their own Constitution they do not override the Constitution of the United States because it is the “law of the land”. It was then that they annulled the prior judgment. The justification was that although the bank itself is not a “sovereign power”, it still “provides the mean of exercising the powers given by the
Open Document