<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>McCulloch v. Maryland by Petty</title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/zpetty/wbgsty3gut8o</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2017-10-25 14:40:39 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2017-10-29 23:31:01 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title>McCulloch v. Maryland</title>
         <author></author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/zpetty/wbgsty3gut8o/wish/201552201</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>	In 1816, Congress consented the creating of the Second Bank of the United States. This new bank had an important role because after the war of 1812, the United States was left with dangerously high debt, and the use of private banks was causing inflation to escalate tremendously. In 1818, the state of Maryland passed legislation to impose taxes on the bank. Mayland wanted to tax the bank because it and many other states felt that a new bank would be used as a symbol of the power and privilege of national wealthy interests. James W. McCulloch, cashier of the Baltimore Branch, refused to pay the $15,000 tax imposed by the state.&nbsp;</div><div>	After McCulloch refused to pay the tax, he was convicted by a Maryland&nbsp; court and fined $2,500. Then, he requested that the case be seen by the Maryland Court of Appeals, failed there, and took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. McCulloch argued that Maryland taxing the national bank was unconstitutional because the bank was a legitimate federal function with which no state may interfere. But, the Maryland argued that the bank itself was unconstitutional because no authority to charter a federal bank is included in the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of creating the bank and that Maryland couldn’t tax it. This case was important because the Supreme Court decided that Congress has implied powers acquired from those listed in Article I, Section 8. The way that this court case relates to federalism is that it was this case that decided that Congress had implied powers and ruled that states were not allowed to make laws that would interfere with congressional laws allowed by the Constitution.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2017-10-29 23:30:33 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/zpetty/wbgsty3gut8o/wish/201552201</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
