Printz v. United States
Necessary and Proper clause, article 1
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act obligated local officers to perform background checks on people that wanted to buy a gun, until the Attorney General has a federal system for it. Sheriffs Jay Printz and Mack, confronted the constitutionality of this provision of the Brady Bill on behalf of CLEOs in Montana and Arizona. District Courts, in both cases, found the background checks to be unconstitutional. The 9th Circuit held that background checks were constitutional, and the Supreme Court gave cetiorari and merged the case with Mack v. United States. Using the Necessary and Proper Clause of Article I as justification, can Congress temporarily require state CLEOs to regulate handgun purchases by performing those duties called for by the Brady Bill's handgun applicant background-checks? No. The Court gave its decision due to an old principle that state legislatures are not subject to federal direction.
The Court stated that while Congress requires the federal govt. to regulate commerce directly, the Necessary and Proper Clause does not empower it to compel state CLEOs to complete its federal tasks. The Court noted that the Brady Bill did not require CLEO's to carry out tasks of throwing away handgun-application forms or notifying certain applicants of the reasons for their refusal in writing.
McCulloch v. Maryland
Argued-1819, Decided- 1819
Maryland passed legislation to impose taxes on The Second Bank of the United States. McCulloch, the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the bank, refused to pay the tax. The questions that the Court had to decide whether Congress had the authority to establish the bank, and did the Maryland law unconstitutionally interfere with congressional powers. In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled that Congress had the power to include the...