McCulloch v. Maryland was a critical decision handed down by the Supre

Question

McCulloch v. Maryland  was a critical decision handed down by the Supreme Court in 1819. The case concerned a Maryland state tax imposed on bank notes issued by the Second Bank of the United States, a national bank chartered by Congress. James McCulloch from the Baltimore branch of the Second Bank disagreed with the tax and filed suit against the state of Maryland. The court found in favor of McCulloch and ordered the Maryland tax repealed, stating that the federal bank supersedes a state bank and  is a “proper and suitable instrument” in Congress’s function to spend funds and impose taxes.  Although immediately concerning the relationship between the national bank and the state of Maryland, the Supreme Court’s holding had consequences that extended much further. Through this ruling, Chief Justice John Marshall set a precedent for what are now two fundamental principles of US law concerning national government: that the Constitution affords Congress implied powers to create institutions that allow the legislative body to govern effectively, and that federal law supersedes state law.    1 
 1. What is the purpose of the highlighted portion?

A. It describes a critical loss for states’ rights advocates.
B. It describes the reasoning behind the Court’s decision.
C. It describes an expansion of federal powers.
D. It describes the importance of a national bank.
E. It describes McCulloch’s claim against the state of Maryland.

2 
 2. Which of the following statements can be inferred from the passage?

A.  McCulloch v. Maryland  established an expansion of federal power.
B. Chief Justice John Marshall sought to limit states’ rights.
C. James McCulloch was an effective barrister.
D. The tax on out-of-state banks was decreased.
E.  McCulloch v. Maryland  ensured the survival of the Second Bank of America.

RC Butler 2023  -  Practice Two RC Passages Everyday.   
Passage # 277 Date: 14 Aug-2023
 This question is part of RC Butler 2023 .  Click here for Details

Vineet921 · Answer

Can someone provide solution for Q 1 ?

dhruva09 · Answer

Hi  Vineet921

In Q1, simply put, the question is asking, what is the function of the highlighted text. 
In such questions, you should take the highlighted text and generally see what is that text exactly doing in context to the lines before and after it.

Let's view the options -

A. It describes a critical loss for states’ rights advocates. - This could be true as an effect, but that is not what is asked. Hence eliminate.

B. It describes the reasoning behind the Court’s decision. - Fair enough, the passage mentions "The court found in favor of McCulloch and ordered the Maryland tax repealed, stating that..." stating that here acts as a reason or justification to the ruling. We can hold this.

C. It describes an expansion of federal powers. - No, nowhere this is mentioned. Eliminate.

D. It describes the importance of a national bank. - No, nowhere this is mentioned. Eliminate.

E. It describes McCulloch’s claim against the state of Maryland. - No, there is no claim described by the Supreme court. Eliminate

Hope this helps.

aryanxx09 · Answer

How did McCulloch v. Maryland established an expansion of federal power? It just supersedes the state law. I wouldn't label it as an expansion.

egmat · Answer

aryanxx09  the federal powers do expand post this case. The expansion of federal power comes primarily from the  first principle  established by the case, not just the second one about superseding state law.

The passage states:  "the Constitution affords Congress implied powers to create institutions that allow the legislative body to govern effectively"

Here's why this is an expansion:

Before this ruling:  Congress could only exercise powers explicitly written in the Constitution 
  After this ruling:  Congress can also exercise IMPLIED powers (powers not explicitly stated but reasonably inferred) 
 This  broadens the scope  of federal authority beyond the explicit text of the Constitution

In this case specifically:

The Constitution doesn't explicitly say Congress can create a national bank 
 The Court ruled Congress has the implied power to do so because it's "proper and suitable" for carrying out explicit powers (like spending funds and imposing taxes) 
 This interpretation  expands  federal power by allowing the government to create institutions not explicitly authorized in the Constitution

The "superseding state law" principle adds to this expansion by establishing federal supremacy, but the core expansion is in the recognition of  implied powers .

You focused on the supersession principle (federal over state), which is about  hierarchy  - who wins when there's a conflict. But you overlooked the implied powers principle, which is about  scope  - what powers the federal government can exercise in the first place. The expansion occurs because the Court broadened the interpretation of federal authority beyond what's explicitly written.

McCulloch v. Maryland was a critical decision handed down by the Supre

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

McCulloch v. Maryland was a critical decision handed down by the Supre

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards