Explain the conflict between the Tenth Admendment and the Necessary and Proper Clause. How was this conflict resolved in McCulloch v. Maryland?
Tenth Amendment:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment10/
N&P Clause:
http://www.answers.com/topic/necessary-and-proper-clause
McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/10.htm
Once you reach your conclusion and post your response, someone here will be able to give you feedback.
=)
The conflict between the Tenth Amendment and the Necessary and Proper Clause arises from different interpretations and applications of the powers granted to the federal government by the United States Constitution.
The Tenth Amendment of the Constitution states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This amendment aims to preserve the sovereignty of the states and limit the powers of the federal government to those specifically granted by the Constitution.
On the other hand, the Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as the Elastic Clause, is found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution. It states that Congress has the power "to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States." This clause grants Congress the ability to pass laws that are necessary and appropriate to execute its enumerated powers.
The conflict arises when determining the extent of the federal government's powers. Critics of expansive federal power argue that the Tenth Amendment limits the authority of the federal government to only those powers explicitly listed in the Constitution. They interpret the Necessary and Proper Clause strictly, asserting that it should only be applied to laws directly related to carrying out the enumerated powers.
In the landmark case of McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), the conflict was addressed and resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court. The case involved a challenge to the constitutionality of the Second Bank of the United States, which was opposed by the state of Maryland. The court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, concluded that the creation of the bank was an implied power under the Constitution, based on the Necessary and Proper Clause. The court also held that Maryland's attempt to tax the bank was unconstitutional, stating that states could not interfere with the legitimate exercise of federal power.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court established several important principles, including the supremacy of federal law over state law and a broad interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause. The court's decision expanded the scope of the federal government's authority and reinforced the balance of power between the states and the federal government.
In summary, the conflict between the Tenth Amendment and the Necessary and Proper Clause revolved around the extent of federal power. The Supreme Court resolved this conflict in McCulloch v. Maryland, upholding the broad interpretation of the Necessary and Proper Clause and affirming the supremacy of federal law over state law in certain matters.