THE AGGREGATE AND IMPLIED POWERS OF THE UNITED STATES
The conventional understanding of McCulloch v. Maryland is that an act of Congress must be within the scope of specified enumerated powers or an appropriate means to carry those specified powers into effect. This now classical doctrine rests on a misunderstanding fMcCulloch. It is also incomplete in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American University law review 2019-01, Vol.69 (1), p.3-104 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The conventional understanding of McCulloch v. Maryland is that an act of Congress must be within the scope of specified enumerated powers or an appropriate means to carry those specified powers into effect. This now classical doctrine rests on a misunderstanding fMcCulloch. It is also incomplete in failing to account for important exercises of national power that cannot readily be tied to specific enumerated powers or justified as means to effectuate those powers. Several distinguished scholars, arguing that the classical means-ends approach is incorrect, assert that Congress possesses an expansive power to legislate for the national general welfare, or, as sometimes articulated, to address all national necessities or exigencies. They rely, inter alia, on the General Welfare Clauses of the Preamble and Article I, Section 8; conceptions of inherent national sovereignty; the actions of the Constitutional Convention concerning Resolution VI of the Virginia Plan; and the three provisions of the Necessary and Proper Clause. Although these scholars present valuable insights, their arguments for a national general welfare power are overbroad when evaluated according to constitutional text, structure, and history. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0003-1453 1943-5673 |