Question

passage for cer questions
the government of the union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action, and its laws, when made in pursuance of the constitution, form the supreme law of the land.
there is nothing in the constitution of the united states similar to the articles of confederation, which exclude incidental or implied powers.
if the end be legitimate, and within the scope of the constitution, all the means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, and which are not prohibited, may constitutionally be employed to carry it into effect...if a certain means to carry into effect of any of the powers expressly given by the constitution to the government of the union be an appropriate measure, not prohibited by the constitution, the degree of its necessity is a question of legislative discretion, not of judicial cognizance.
write your response in claim-evidence-reasoning (cer) format:

• 4 points

claim: state how the courts decision in mcculloch v. maryland changed or clarified the balance of power between state and federal governments.
evidence: cite at least two pieces of evidence from the passage.
reasoning: explain why this evidence connects to your claim.
your answer

Explanation:

Claim:

The Court’s decision in McCulloch v. Maryland clarified that the federal government has supreme authority within its constitutional scope, while also acknowledging legislative discretion in implementing its powers, thus strengthening federal power relative to state governments.

Evidence:

1. "The Government of the Union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action, and its laws, when made in pursuance of the Constitution, form the supreme law of the land."
2. "If the end be legitimate, and within the scope of the Constitution, all the means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, and which are not prohibited, may constitutionally be employed to carry it into effect... If a certain means to carry into effect of any of the powers expressly given by the Constitution to the Government of the Union be an appropriate measure, not prohibited by the Constitution, the degree of its necessity is a question of legislative discretion, not of judicial cognizance."

Reasoning:

The first piece of evidence establishes the supremacy of federal law when made under the Constitution, directly showing that federal authority is supreme in its domain, which shifts the balance toward the federal government. The second piece of evidence outlines the "implied powers" doctrine, stating that the federal government can use appropriate means to achieve constitutional ends, and that the necessity of such means is a legislative (federal) decision, not judicial. This expands federal power by allowing it to act beyond strictly enumerated powers, further clarifying that the federal government has broad authority within constitutional bounds, reducing state governments’ ability to challenge federal actions within those bounds.

Answer:

Claim:

The Court’s decision in McCulloch v. Maryland clarified that the federal government has supreme authority within its constitutional scope, while also acknowledging legislative discretion in implementing its powers, thus strengthening federal power relative to state governments.

Evidence:

1. "The Government of the Union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action, and its laws, when made in pursuance of the Constitution, form the supreme law of the land."
2. "If the end be legitimate, and within the scope of the Constitution, all the means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, and which are not prohibited, may constitutionally be employed to carry it into effect... If a certain means to carry into effect of any of the powers expressly given by the Constitution to the Government of the Union be an appropriate measure, not prohibited by the Constitution, the degree of its necessity is a question of legislative discretion, not of judicial cognizance."

Reasoning:

The first piece of evidence establishes the supremacy of federal law when made under the Constitution, directly showing that federal authority is supreme in its domain, which shifts the balance toward the federal government. The second piece of evidence outlines the "implied powers" doctrine, stating that the federal government can use appropriate means to achieve constitutional ends, and that the necessity of such means is a legislative (federal) decision, not judicial. This expands federal power by allowing it to act beyond strictly enumerated powers, further clarifying that the federal government has broad authority within constitutional bounds, reducing state governments’ ability to challenge federal actions within those bounds.