derrierloisirs.fr
» » Aggressive Nationalism: McCulloch v. Maryland and the Foundation of Federal Authority in the Young Republic

Download Aggressive Nationalism: McCulloch v. Maryland and the Foundation of Federal Authority in the Young Republic ePub

by Richard E. Ellis

Download Aggressive Nationalism: McCulloch v. Maryland and the Foundation of Federal Authority in the Young Republic ePub
  • ISBN 0195323564
  • ISBN13 978-0195323566
  • Language English
  • Author Richard E. Ellis
  • Publisher Oxford University Press; 1 edition (August 22, 2007)
  • Pages 280
  • Formats lrf mobi txt lit
  • Category History
  • Subcategory Americas
  • Size ePub 1886 kb
  • Size Fb2 1473 kb
  • Rating: 4.4
  • Votes: 585

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) has long been recognized to be one of the most significant decisions ever handed down by the United States Supreme Court. Indeed, many scholars have argued it is the greatest opinion handed down by the greatest Chief Justice, in which he declared the act creating the Second Bank of the United States constitutional and Maryland's attempt to tax it unconstitutional. Although it is now recognized as the foundational statement for a strong and active federal government, the immediate impact of the ruling was short-lived and widely criticized. Placing the decision and the public reaction to it in their proper historical context, Richard E. Ellis finds that Maryland, though unopposed to the Bank, helped to bring the case before the Court and a sympathetic Chief Justice, who worked behind the scenes to save the embattled institution. Almost all treatments of the case consider it solely from Marshall's perspective, yet a careful examination reveals other, even more important issues that the Chief Justice chose to ignore. Ellis demonstrates that the points which mattered most to the States were not treated by the Court's decision: the private, profit-making nature of the Second Bank, its right to establish branches wherever it wanted with immunity from state taxation, and the right of the States to tax the Bank simply for revenue purposes. Addressing these issues would have undercut Marshall's nationalist view of the Constitution, and his unwillingness to adequately deal with them produced immediate, widespread, and varied dissatisfaction among the States. Ellis argues that Marshall's "aggressive nationalism" was ultimately counter-productive: his overreaching led to Jackson's democratic rejection of the decision and failed to reconcile states' rights to the effective operation of the institutions of federal governance. Elegantly written, full of new information, and the first in-depth examination of McCulloch v. Maryland, Aggressive Nationalism offers an incisive, fresh interpretation of this familiar decision central to understanding the shifting politics of the early republic as well as the development of federal-state relations, a source of constant division in American politics, past and present.

Ellis Richard E. (EN). McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) has long been recognized to be one of the most significant decisions ever handed down by the United States Supreme Court.

Ellis Richard E. Indeed, many scholars have argued it is the greatest opinion handed down by the greatest Chief Justice, in which he declared the act creating the Second Bank of the United States constitutional and Marylands attempt to tax it unconstitutional. Although it is now recognized as the foundational statement for a strong and active federal government, the immediate impact of the ruling was short-lived and widely criticized.

Richard E. Ellis is Professor of History at the University of Buffalo, SUNY. Among his published works are The Jeffersonian Crisis: Courts and Politics in the Young Republic (1971) and The Union at Risk: Jacksonian Democracy, State's Rights, and the Nullification Crisis (1987). He has held grants from The John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the American Council of Learned Societies.

The book also examines the relationship between McCulloch v. Maryland and the creation of a federal program of internal improvements. Do you want to read the rest of this article? Request full-text.

It sheds new light on how the case came before the US Supreme Court. The book also examines the relationship between McCulloch v. Maryland and the creation of a federal program of. .This book examines the public debate that took place over Chief Justice John Marshall's famous decision in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

The book also examines the relationship between McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). It sheds new light on how the case came before the US Supreme Court. It also examines many of the key issues involved in the case that John Marshall either slighted or totally ignored: the private profit-making nature of the Second Bank of the United States (2 BUS); the power of the 2 BUS to create branches in the states without their consent, which many people viewed as a direct assault upon the sovereignty.

McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 . 316 (1819), was a . Ellis, Richard (2007). Aggressive Nationalism: McCulloch v. Maryland and the Foundation of Federal Authority in the Young Republic. Supreme Court decision that defined the scope of the . Congress's legislative power and how it relates to the powers of American state legislatures.

Ellis at 149 (identifying Hammond as "the leading figure among the antibank forces" in Ohio). Oxford University Press.

Ellis argues that Marshall's "aggressive nationalism" was ultimately counter-productive: his overreaching led to.

Ellis argues that Marshall's "aggressive nationalism" was ultimately counter-productive: his overreaching led to Jackson's democratic rejection of the decision and failed to reconcile states' rights to the effective operation of the institutions of federal governance. Elegantly written, full of new information, and the first in-depth examination of McCulloch v. Maryland, Aggressive Nationalism.

Talk about Aggressive Nationalism: McCulloch v. Maryland and the Foundation of Federal Authority in the Young Republic


unmasked
The author, Richard Ellis, wrote the classic study of the Jeffersonian period and the courts, "The Jeffersonian Crisis: Courts and Politics in the Young Republic," in 1971. So he is intimately familiar with the Marshall court and, equally important, the context in which important precedent-setting decisions were handed down, including the subject of this book: "McCulloch v. Maryland." The articles and books on this case would weigh a ton if collected; what is different about this book? Ellis for one thing takes his time in setting the stage--i.e., he does not just jump into the Supreme Court arguments and decision. His introduction illuminates many of the key themes he will develop more fully in the book. Next he discusses the role of the Court in early federal/state relations, and how the Judiciary Acts played a role. An entire chapter is devoted to the two Banks of the U.S. which gave rise to the case, how the states reacted to them, and how the state actions varied from state to state.

It is not until page 76 that we get into the actual case itself and Marshall's epic decision--after we have been well prepared to understand the context of what was occurring. Ellis carefully traces the contents of the arguments which he believes afforded the Court a "perceptive and searching exploration of the issues." There are many subordinate issues in addition to the reach of the "necessary and proper clause" and state taxing of federal instrumentalities, and Ellis covers them all concisely. An interesting point that Ellis makes that had not occurred to me was the close interconnection between the case and the concurrent debate about the power of the federal government to develop internal improvements. An entire chapter is devoted to Virginia's response to the decision, which gave rise to the famous exchange of anonymous(?) articles between Marshall and Spencer Roane and others regarding the decision. As usual, Ellis' research is comprehensive and impeccable, since he really is intimately familiar with all this. Next, the reaction to the decision in Ohio (probably the most hyper state) and Georgia is reviewed. Finally, in a "Coda," there is discussion of other states in opposition to the decision, including Tennessee, North Carolina and Kentucky. A bit about Andy Jackson and his fireworks with the bank also is included.

All of this analysis is covered in 218 pages, with an additional 36 pages of comprehensive notes (but no bibliography). Ellis writes with a clarity and cogency seldom seen in work on the Court, so that even a constitutional history novice is soon at home because Ellis so well explains not just what happened but why it happened. The typography is unusually bright and easy to read--I wish Oxford had identified the typeface. A very valuable resource even for the seasoned student of the Court.
Pettalo
Professor Ellis in his book, "Aggressive Nationalism" states in the Introduction that Justice Marshall claims that "the power to tax is the power to destroy". However, in his essay on McCulloch in Constitutional Cases edited by Kermit Hall, Ellis provides us with the exact and accurate quote from McCulloch that the "Power to tax INVOLVES the power to destroy" in reference to the potential harm if the Court allowed the States to tax the US Bank. I am curious as to the discrepancy in the two conflicting examples from McCulloch. Otherwise, this is an excellent analysis of this most famous case. Also, his abbreviation for the second US Bank can be distracting at times.
Nilasida
Excellent treatment of economic, political, legal, and constitutional dimensions of a foundational US Supreme Court decision. Ellis's book slices into the gravamen of federalism.
Small Black
This is a must have for anyone interested in the history of the Supreme Court. Easy to read and understand. Not a book to gather dust. Ellis explains in clear language how this major decision of Chief Justice Marshall affects us today.
Umge
For those with an interest in the early history of the U.S. Constitution and the key federal case that largely determined the future power balance between the national government and states.

This book also will be of great value to those desiring a better understanding of the country's first banking system and the economic issues present as our country took wing. Actually, this effort is more about the Second Bank of the United States than the legal proceeding of McCulloch v. Maryland.

Professor Ellis downplays the contemporary importance of this famous case while also, I think, undervaluing the contributions of our greatest Chief Justice, John Marshall.
Linn
This book is a sophisticated reinterpretation of a critical court case in the early national period. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) has been one of the two most cited cases of the Marshall Court, enforcing the implied powers of the national government over those of the states. Ellis turns that fundamental result on its head and asks what the immediate repercussions of the decision might have been. He finds that immediately thereafter the ruling was largely ignored, even widely criticized. He also offers a counter to the dominant position about Marshall's nation-building theme, by suggesting that if we move beyond the Chief Justice's nationalistic perspective alternative positions were appropriate but largely ignored by the decision.

The case was really about the constitutionality of the Second Bank of the United States, a public/private partnership that some believed represented a gross overstepping of legitimate federal power. At a fundamental level it represented a debate over national prerogative versus states' rights. Marshall ignored in his opinion many of the points that seemed to be of the most concern to the defendants. Those included the propriety of the federal government chartering a private, profit-making national bank, that bank's authority to conduct its business wherever it wished, its imperviousness to taxation and regulation, and a host of other concerns. Looked at in this manner, the state of Maryland had an important matter for resolution that Marshall decided not to address.

Instead John Marshall reemphasized the power of the federal government to the exclusion of the rights of the states. This important contention would consume national/state relations through the Civil War era and some might say that it is still far from settled. "Aggressive Nationalism" is a good title for this book as Marshall defended that to the exclusion of any sense of state prerogative.