Lawyordle™ · Study archive

#49 · 2026-09-24 · Case

McCulloch v. Maryland

Answer: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). The Court held that Congress could charter the Second Bank as a means plainly adapted to enumerated ends under the Necessary and Proper Clause, and that a state may not tax or otherwise control the operations of a federal instrumentality; nondiscriminatory taxes on real property or shareholders’ interests were distinguished as permissible. ([law.cornell.edu](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/17/316))

Rule to remember

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) established that Congress has implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause to charter a national bank and that states cannot tax or otherwise impede federal instruments under the Supremacy Clause (intergovernmental tax immunity).

Key elements and checks

In the source’s words

“Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitution,”

M'CULLOCH v. STATE OF MARYLAND et al. | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

“The result is a conviction that the states have no power, by taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner control,”

M'CULLOCH v. STATE OF MARYLAND et al. | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

This is federal constitutional doctrine; state constitutions’ “necessary and proper” provisions vary for state powers but cannot limit federal implied powers or supremacy. States may tax federal-related activity where Congress consents; details depend on statute and case law.

Sources