Powerful Federal Government

“Federalism is a system of government in which entities such as states or provinces share power with a national government. The United States government functions according to the principles of federalism.” Implied powers doctrine came out by the State of Maryland to block the operations of federally supported Second Bank of the United States. The state Legislature placed a tax on notes held by all banks originally built outside of the state. It didn’t speak of the Second Bank, the Supreme Court discovered that it could establish that this was the reason of the law, given that no other out of state banks existed in Maryland. The Supreme Court said no to the actions of the state by finding that the Federal Government held implied powers under the Constitution, it exercised by creating federal banks.

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.

They both played huge roles in his life, and political career. Washington’s friendship would put him in a place of power, and Jefferson’s rivalry would help keep said power in check. When Washington placed him as the first United States Secretary of the Treasury, he gave Hamilton a podium to achieve his view of what America should be. The same could be said when he made Thomas Jefferson the first Secretary of the State. It’s safe to say that Washington leaned on Hamilton more for ideas.

By splitting up the types of power the government and states hold, the citizens’ rights are afforded, as noted by James Madison, “double security” from tyranny by either the states or the government. All other political power remains with the states as a result of the 10th Amendment which also states that the federal government may only exercise the powers as defined within the Constitution. Unless the people want the federal government to execute a power, then the government can not take such individual actions like they have with the Net-neutrality rules. As Madison wrote in Federalist #45 of the Federalist Papers “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” This statement of Madison’s serves as a reference that helps to further justify the state of Washington’s actions to pass a law to retain the original Net-neutrality rules that the government had no authority to change in the first place.

The Constitution was twisted in many ways by the court in this case. Since slaves were considered property, the government couldn 't constitutionally justify taking me away from my owner. The government also couldn 't prohibit slavery or stop it from spreading to free states. This argument is from amendment 10 in the constitution that states that the federal government only has powers that are delegated to them by the states or the people through the constitution. In other words, if the constitution doesn 't prohibit something, the court can 't prohibit it.

One of the first officials records of the United States was The Articles of Confederation. From the earliest starting point of the American Revolution, Congress felt it was essential for a more grounded and stronger union and a legislature sufficiently effective to thrashing Great Britain. Following a couple short years, the Articles were supplanted by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Articles were a stepping stone which prompted the Constitution however the Articles contained a larger number of shortcomings which constrained the colonists to dispose of them and create a new document. Preceding the Revolutionary War, large portions of the first thirteen colonial assemblies made regional claims to these areas which postponed the adoption of the Articles of Confederation.

The way something is interpreted is how it is used in the practices of law, so indeed the way something is written is imperative. Judicial Review is never actually explicitly stated and described in the constitution. The importance of interpretation goes right along with the concept of judicial review. If you boil things down that’s all judicial review is, a concept. Now this ‘concept’ was derived from the constitution by our justices in the supreme court, but it is something that falls under the interpretation of the constitution.

A lot of states didn’t like this because there was nothing in the Constitution that says Congress can do this. So the state of Maryland decided to try and get rid of it, by taxing it. So the question was can a state tax a federal bank and can Congress create a national bank that states have to live with? Chief Justice John Marshall found the Necessary and Proper Clause gave Congress the flexibility to create the bank as an aid to carrying out its enumerated borrowing and taxing powers and that Maryland’s taxation of the bank violated the Supremacy Clause. Another example of Congress’ power to make laws was the U. S. vs. Comstock case which gave a wide understanding of the Necessary and Proper Clause.

"(“Roth”).The court said the first Amendment was not planned to protect statements like Roth’s. The problem is the First Amendment does not specify what kind of speech is protected or not. It simply says “Congress shall make no law….abridging the freedom of speech” ("First Amendment (ratified 1791”). Nowhere in the Amendment does it specify what kind of speech is protected. In addition, United State also violated its citizen’s right by creating a law (The Federal Obscenity Statute) to limit the speech of the people, which is an

Gideon v. Wainwright was a very important case for the Supreme Court; it guaranteed the same kind of fair trial in state courts as was expected in federal courts. In 1961 Clarence Gideon was denied an attorney in a state court and he appealed to the Supreme Court arguing this was violating his constitutional right to a fair trial. This was going against a previous decision by a Federal Court of Appeals in 1941. The Supreme Court accepted Gideon's petition and reviewed the decision of the Court of Appeals. In 1963 the Supreme Court decided in favor of Gideon and overruled the previous decision changing the precedent for all state courts.

According to the map “Ratification of the Federal Constitution, 1787-1790,” a large amount of the states had a federalist majority, meaning that they supported the Constitution. Most of the Federalists were rich men who were large landowners, judges, lawyers, leading clergymen and merchants. Led by Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, James Madison, and George Washington, federalists “believed the national government was too wear under the Articles of Confederation” and wanted a strong federal government (Document 3). However, the antifederalists disagreed with the Constitution. They “feared strong national government would lead to tyranny” and wanted strong state governments (Document 3).

In Document A, it is clearly stated that James Madison, a main contributor to the Constitution, wanted “[a] compound republic of America” to provide a “double security” for our rights. As both central and state governments in the compound republic have different functions, this helps keep our states in a union while letting the states stay independent. In other words, Madison wanted federalism in our country. Because both state and local governments check each other due to their separate