McCulloch v. Maryland

Question: Did the Unite States Congress have the authority to establish a national bank? And also whether or not the Maryland law to tax the bank was interfering with congressional power? The Necessary and Proper Clause, also known as section 8, clause 18 of the Constitution is what is in question.
Background: In the year 1816, the U.S. Congress created the Second Bank of America. This was a national bank, and was not a bank considered to be a local Maryland bank. In 1818, the state of Maryland set up legislation to tax the bank. The cashier of The Second Bank of America refused to pay the tax. Section 8, clause 18 of the Constitution is in question here because it is a matter of how much power does the Necessary and Proper Clause give congress.
Decision: The Court voted 7 for McCulloch and 0 for Maryland. The Supreme court ruled that Congress maintained …show more content…
They decided that the Fifth Amendment was only applicable to the National Government and that it did not restrict state legislation. Therefore the Court ruled in favor of Baltimore, saying they were not required to provide compensation.

Reynolds v. United States

Question: Did Reynolds have the ability to raise claims during the Attorney General’s interim rule? And is it appropriate for the Supreme Court to resolve the split between the circuit courts?

Background: Billy Joe Reynolds pleaded guilty to knowingly not registering for the SORNA or Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act. He then appealed the case and challenged that because of the interim rule of the Attorney General that the Act was unconstitutional.

Decision: The Court ruled in favor of Reynolds with a vote 7 to 2. They decided that because of the interim rule and the Act not clearly saying whether offenders before the Act had to register or not, that legally Reynolds was innocent of his crime of not registering.

Plessy v.