About: McCulloch v. Maryland     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : umbel-rc:Event, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon
http://dbpedia.org/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FMcCulloch_v._Maryland

McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that defined the scope of the U.S. Congress's legislative power and how it relates to the powers of American state legislatures. The dispute in McCulloch involved the legality of the national bank and a tax that the state of Maryland imposed on it. In its ruling, the Supreme Court established firstly that the "Necessary and Proper" Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives the U.S. federal government certain implied powers necessary and proper for the exercise of the powers enumerated explicitly in the Constitution, and secondly that the American federal government is supreme over the states, and so states' ability to interfere with the federal government is restricted. Since the legislature has th

AttributesValues
rdf:type
rdfs:label
  • McCulloch v. Maryland (de)
  • McCulloch contro Maryland (it)
  • McCulloch v. Maryland (en)
  • 맥컬록 대 메릴랜드 주 사건 (ko)
  • Caso McCulloch v. Maryland (pt)
  • 麦卡洛克诉马里兰州案 (zh)
rdfs:comment
  • 맥컬록 대 메릴랜드주 사건(McCulloch v. Maryland 17 U.S. 316 (1819)) 연방정부가 설립한 은행에 대하여 주정부는 세금을 매겼는데 이에 대해 대법원은 연방정부의 은행 설립권한은 헌법에 명시되어 있지 않으나 헌법의 필요적절조항에 따라 은행 설립권한을 가진다고 판결을 내렸다. 따라서 의회의 은행설립에 관한 법률은 주법에 우선하므로 주정부의 연방은행에 대한 조세부과는 위헌이라고 판결하였다. (ko)
  • 麦卡洛克诉马里兰州案( U.S. 316 (1819))是美国最高法院的一个著名案例。马里兰州向美国第二银行在该州的分行征收税款来试图阻止其运转。该州法案虽然写明适用于一切未经该州许可的银行,但实际上仅美国第二银行的分行符合条款所述,故该法案在法庭上被认为是专门针对美国第二银行。法庭援引宪法中说明国会有权通过有关未列入宪法却合宪的法案。 这一基本事例依如下两项原则: 1. * 宪法授予国会使其能够履行宪法赋予的权利,组建功能完备的政府。 2. * 州政府无权立法阻止联邦政府行使合宪权利的行为。 本案的最终裁决由首席大法官约翰·马歇尔撰写。 (zh)
  • Im Fall McCulloch v. Maryland verkündete der Oberste Gerichtshof der Vereinigten Staaten 1819 eine Grundsatzentscheidung zum Föderalismus in den Vereinigten Staaten. Der Bundesstaat Maryland hatte versucht, die Tätigkeit einer Niederlassung der bundeseigenen Second Bank of the United States zu beeinträchtigen, indem er eine Steuer auf alle Banknoten erhob, die von nicht in Maryland gegründeten Banken ausgegeben wurden. Der Oberste Gerichtshof erklärte das Gesetz zur Erhebung der Steuer als verfassungswidrig, weil es mit den impliziten Gesetzgebungskompetenzen des Kongresses im Konflikt stand, die auf der “necessary and proper”-Klausel des ersten Artikels der Verfassung der Vereinigten Staaten beruhen. Die Klausel gibt dem Kongress die Befugnis, Gesetze über den explizit genannten Katalog a (de)
  • McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that defined the scope of the U.S. Congress's legislative power and how it relates to the powers of American state legislatures. The dispute in McCulloch involved the legality of the national bank and a tax that the state of Maryland imposed on it. In its ruling, the Supreme Court established firstly that the "Necessary and Proper" Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives the U.S. federal government certain implied powers necessary and proper for the exercise of the powers enumerated explicitly in the Constitution, and secondly that the American federal government is supreme over the states, and so states' ability to interfere with the federal government is restricted. Since the legislature has th (en)
  • McCulloch contro Maryland è un caso giudiziario affrontato dalla Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti nel 1819. Il caso, nato dal tentativo dello stato del Maryland di ostacolare l'attività della Seconda banca degli Stati Uniti d'America, ha portato la Corte Suprema a stabilire che il governo federale ha alcuni poteri impliciti, non enumerati espliticamente nella Costituzione, e che il potere dei singoli stati di interferire con le decisioni del governo federale è limitato. (it)
  • McCulloch v. Maryland, foi uma decisão da Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos. O estado de Maryland tentou impedir o funcionamento de uma filial do Segundo Banco dos Estados Unidos, através da imposição de um imposto sobre todas as notas dos bancos não fundados em Maryland. O Segundo Banco dos Estados Unidos era o único banco então presente no estado que não tinha sido fundado neste. Foi reconhecido na decisão do tribunal que o estado havia direcionado especificamente o Banco dos Estados Unidos. O Tribunal invocou a Teoria dos Poderes Implícitos da Constituição, que permitiu ao governo Federal que aprovasse leis que não sejam expressamente previstos na Constituição, de uma lista de poderes expressos, desde que essas leis sejam úteis em prol de poderes do Congresso, nos termos da Constituição. (pt)
foaf:name
  • (en)
  • James McCulloch v. The State of Maryland, John James (en)
name
  • McCulloch v. Maryland (en)
foaf:depiction
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/Daniel_Webster_1824_Signature.jpg
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/Mccullochvmaryland.png
dcterms:subject
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024


Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE     Content Formats:   [cxml] [csv]     RDF   [text] [turtle] [ld+json] [rdf+json] [rdf+xml]     ODATA   [atom+xml] [odata+json]     Microdata   [microdata+json] [html]    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (62 GB total memory, 60 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software