Teacher Resources: Lesson Plan

Exploring Enumerated and Implied Powers

Overview

In the early Nineteenth century, the United States federal government struggled to define its powers. Under the Marshall Court, the doctrine of implied powers was established. This lesson examines the Court's decisions that established implied powers. Students will discuss the Court's interpretation of Article 1 in McCullough v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden, as well as analyze the Constitution in order to understand the difference between enumerated and implied powers.

National Curriculum Standards met by this lesson

For a list of standards that this unit addresses, click here.

Ties To Your Curriculum

This lesson ties into United States History when studying:

This lesson ties into United States Government/Civics when studying:

State vs. Federal Powers

Time Required

2-3 50-minute class periods

Materials

The Lesson

Anticipatory Set

  1. Ask students to list all of the powers that they know for the three branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial.
  2. On a big piece of paper or the chalkboard, create a chart for the three branches. Have students explain the powers that they brainstormed and place them under the appropriate branch. (Correct them if they are wrong.)
  3. Assign the Court Defines Itself essay as homework.

Procedures

  1. Explain to the students that today's lesson will be about the types of powers in the Constitution: enumerated and implied. Enumerated powers are powers that are specifically stated in the Constitution. Implied are believed to be given in the Constitution although they are not specifically stated.
  2. Inform the class that the implied powers were debated in the beginning of the Nineteenth century, but the Supreme Court established implied powers in its early decisions. The class will focus on two of these cases: McCullough v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden.
  3. Pass out the summary sheet on McCullough v. Maryland. Read the summary together.
  4. Pass out the copies of the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8. Explain that this section states the powers of the Legislative Branch.
  5. Give students copies of the worksheet. As a class, they will "judge" the case. Using Article 1 of the Constitution, you will develop a judicial ruling.
  6. Have a student to read Article 1 aloud.
  7. Ask students if any of the clauses would justify the creation of a national bank. **Some possible answers: not justified, Clause 1, 2, 3, & 5 deal with money and business, Clause 18 is the elastic clause.
  8. Tell students the Court's actual ruling: Congress had the implied powers to establish a national bank because it was a reasonable authority to assume from its enumerated powers.
  9. Work on the second question on the worksheet. Ask students to write their own opinion based on the Constitution and the law. After they are finished, ask for some volunteers to read their opinion.
  10. Tell students the actual ruling: Although the states have the power to tax, the Constitution is a higher law and the states cannot interfere with it.
  11. Pass out the summary of Gibbons v. Ogden. Explain to students that this case occurred five years after McCullough v. Maryland. The cases are related in that they both dealt with federal vs. state laws.
  12. Read the summary together.
  13. Ask students to look again at Article 1 of the Constitution. Read Section 8, Clause 3 about commerce. Hold a discussion about the summary question: Does NY state's licensing law interfere with Congress' power to regulate commerce?
  14. After the class has sufficiently debated the question, inform students that the Supreme Court unanimously found that state law did indeed interfere with Congress's power. Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that the use of commerce in the Constitution referred to not only buying and selling goods, but also implied the inclusion of the transportation of the goods. Therefore the federal law that gave Gibbons the right to navigate was superior to the state law. (See Constitution Article 6, Section 2--the supremacy clause.)

Assessment

Use the following worksheet for student assessment. Students could work on this individually or as partners. For 100 points, score each question out of 25 points.

25 points = answered completely with a rich variety of specific and/or supporting details

20 points = answered completely with supporting and/or specific details

15 points = clearly answered with minimal support

10 points = answered but needs more support for clarity

5 points = answered with no supporting information

0 points = did not answer question

Related Works

http://www.landmarkcases.org/gibbons/background1.html

Landmark Cases--This website provides a well written summary of the case, as well as many other historic cases. Many of the cases have student activities. The link provided is to a page of activities that correspond to Gibbons v. Ogden.

http://www.oyez.org/oyez/frontpage

Oyez Project--this website is a very complete reference for the Supreme Court, including the latest cases and information.

Interdisciplinary Works

Art: Student groups could create posters for each side of the court cases.

Math: Students could research and graph interstate commerce between New York and New Jersey today.

Worksheets

SUMMARY OF MCCULLOUGH V. MARYLAND, 1819

In 1816 Congress established the second Bank of the United States. Many states objected to a national bank and wanted to limit it. In Maryland, the state passed a law that taxed currency printed by the national bank or allowed the bank to avoid the tax by paying an annual fee of $15,000. The branch manager of the national bank, James McCullough, refused to pay both the tax and the annual fee. Maryland sued McCullough, and Maryland courts ordered the national bank to pay. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court.

In the appeal, the Supreme Court needed to consider two questions:

  1. Did the federal government have the power to establish a national bank?
  2. Did the state law interfere with Congressional powers?

WORKSHEET FOR MCCULLOUGH V. MARYLAND, 1819

State yes or no and give a detailed explanation of the reasoning behind your decision. Include which part of the Constitution you are using to support your answer.

Question 1: Did the federal government have the power to establish a national bank?

Question 2: Did the state law interfere with Congressional powers?

SUMMARY OF GIBBONS V. OGDEN, 1824

Gibbons and Ogden were partners in a profitable steamboat company that shipped goods interstate between New York and New Jersey. The company had a monopoly on using the steamboats because the state of New York gave Ogden the sole operating rights. When Ogden and Gibbons split up, Gibbons partnered with Cornelius Vanderbilt and gained a license to run steamboats under the federal Coasting License Act of 1793. Of course, Ogden sued, stating that Gibbons was violating his state license granting operating rights only to his company. The case was eventually appealed to the Supreme Court.

In the appeal, the Supreme Court needed to consider the following question:

WORKSHEET FOR GIBBONS V. OGDEN, 1824

Answer the following questions completely, supporting your answer with specific details.

  1. Gibbons v. Ogden is considered one of the most important Supreme Court rulings. Why do you think it was important for the country to have a ruling on interstate commerce?
  2. In his opinion, Chief Justice John Marshall stated the following:

    3. ...What is it that is to be regulated? Not the commerce of the several States, respectively, but the commerce of the United States. Henceforth, the commerce of the States was to be an unit; and the system by which it was to exist and be governed, must necessarily be complete, entire, and uniform. Its character was to be described in the flag which waved over it, E PLURIBUS UNUM.

    Why is the motto E PLURIBUS UNUM (From Many One) important in a ruling on interstate commerce?

  3. If the case would have been about intrastate commerce instead of interstate, how do you think the Supreme Court would have ruled? Why?
  4. Explain how the Marshall Court established the recognition of implied powers.