McCulloch v. Maryland
1819·Unit 1: Foundations of American Democracy
Congress has implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause, and states cannot tax valid federal institutions.
- Decided
- 1819
- Clause at issue
- Supremacy Clause (Article VI)
- Course unit
- Unit 1
- Case number
- 2 of 14
Case brief
The three pieces every AP answer about this case should get right.
- 1
The facts
Congress created a national bank, and Maryland attempted to tax that bank.
- 2
The constitutional question
Can Congress create a bank even though it is not explicitly listed in Article I, and can a state tax a federal institution?
- 3
The holding
The Court ruled in favor of the federal government.
Why it matters
- Necessary and Proper Clause supports implied federal powers when tied to enumerated powers.
- Supremacy Clause prevents states from undermining legitimate federal action.
Check yourself
Three questions on McCulloch v. Maryland: the holding, a common mix-up, and how it differs from another required case.
Question 1 of 3
The Supreme Court ruled in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) that Maryland could not tax the Second Bank of the United States. Which of the following provisions most directly supports that part of the ruling?
SCOTUS comparison FRQ
Can you connect McCulloch v. Maryland to a case you’ve never seen?
The exam hands you an unfamiliar case and asks how it relates to a required one. Practice that here: name the shared principle, state the holding, and explain the connection.
Start the comparisonYou’ll compare it with
Arizona v. United States (2012)
Three parts
- A. Identify the shared principle
- B. Describe the required case
- C. Explain the connection
Frequently asked questions
What two holdings do I need from McCulloch?
Congress could charter a national bank, and Maryland could not tax it. The bank is an implied power. The tax fails because a state cannot undermine a valid federal institution.
Does “necessary” in the Necessary and Proper Clause mean indispensable?
No. That was Maryland’s argument, and the Court rejected it. A law is “necessary” here when it is an appropriate way to carry out an enumerated power such as borrowing or taxing, even if the Constitution never says “bank.”
Which clause blocks the state tax?
The Supremacy Clause. Once the bank is a legitimate federal operation, a state tax that could destroy it loses. Students who only mention implied powers miss half of the case.
How should I contrast McCulloch with United States v. Lopez?
McCulloch is the expansion case: implied powers plus supremacy. Lopez is the limit case: the Commerce Clause does not cover a gun brought to a local school. Use McCulloch when the new scenario is a federal means tied to an enumerated power. Use Lopez when the federal law has no real commercial connection.
The other required cases
- Marbury v. Madison1803
- Schenck v. United States1919
- Brown v. Board of Education1954
- Baker v. Carr1962
- Engel v. Vitale1962
- Gideon v. Wainwright1963
- Tinker v. Des Moines1969
- New York Times Co. v. United States1971
- Wisconsin v. Yoder1972
- Shaw v. Reno1993
- United States v. Lopez1995
- McDonald v. Chicago2010
- Citizens United v. FEC2010