McCulloch v Maryland is an important case because it was one of the cases whereby the Supreme Court (Points : 1)

asserted the supreme authority of Congress.
asserted national authority over the states.
upheld states’ rights.
affirmed Maryland’s right to tax national property.

And you think ... ?

I think it might be c, but it was a tax situation so I am not sure.

can anyone help? I think it is c.

McCulloch v Maryland is an important case because it asserted national authority over the states.

To understand why McCulloch v Maryland is significant, let's explore the case and its outcome. In 1819, the state of Maryland passed a law imposing taxes on the Bank of the United States, which was a federally chartered bank. James McCulloch, the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the Bank, refused to pay the tax. The state of Maryland then sued McCulloch.

The main question presented to the Supreme Court in this case was whether the federal government had the power to establish a national bank, and if so, whether the state of Maryland had the authority to tax it. The Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, delivered a landmark decision that asserted national authority over the states.

The Court's decision stated that the federal government has implied powers beyond those explicitly listed in the Constitution. This notion, known as implied powers or the necessary and proper clause, allowed Congress to take actions necessary to carry out its enumerated powers. In this case, the establishment of a national bank was considered necessary and proper for the functioning of the federal government. Therefore, the Court held that Maryland's tax on the Bank of the United States was unconstitutional because it interfered with the federal government's legitimate exercise of its powers.

By asserting national authority over state laws that impede the functioning of the federal government, the Court's decision in McCulloch v Maryland strengthened the power and supremacy of the federal government. It established the principle that federal laws and institutions have supremacy over state laws and authority. Therefore, the correct answer is that this case asserted national authority over the states.