The 1819 Supreme Court case of McCulloch v. Maryland had a few significant effects. Directly relating to the case, it established the precedent that it was within the power of Congress to incorporate a bank. Furthermore, a state could not levy taxes on an institution that is operating under the mandate of the federal government. Simply put, a state or local government cannot tax the national government, because the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution states that federal law is superior to state and local law.

Indirectly, this case had some more wide-ranging effects. It defined and expanded the role of the federal government. In Chief Justice Marshall's written opinion, he stated that Congress has the right to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers." In other words, the national bank was constitutional, because it was necessary for carrying out the duties of the national government.

This case helped better define federalism in the United States. As a result of the court's decision, it was clear that the federal government could create institutions and make laws that were not explicitly laid out in the Constitution as long as they helped the government carry out its powers as enumerated by the Constitution.

What was the most important result of Marshall's decision in McCulloch v. Maryland?

One of the most important long-term consequences of McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) was the strengthening of the legal foundations of a federal banking system. As a staunch Federalist, Chief Justice Marshall was a firm believer in a strong central government, which entailed, among other things, a federal banking system that would facilitate America's transition to a modern industrialized state.

The ruling he handed down in McCulloch v. Maryland helped consolidate the power of the federal government in general, but specifically in relation to the banking system. The legality of the First Bank of the United States—a controversial issue for decades—was strongly affirmed here due to the Supreme Court's highly creative interpretation of the "Necessary and Proper" clause of the United States Constitution.

Even though the federal government wasn't explicitly authorized to operate a central banking system, the Supreme Court nonetheless found an implicit authorization was contained in the "Necessary and Proper" clause. This ruling had enormous implications for the power of the federal government and its relations with the states. From now on, the federal government could arrogate to itself powers that were not specifically set out in the Constitution but could nonetheless be discovered there through the kind of subtle judicial interpretation displayed by Chief Justice Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland.

What was the most important result of Marshall's decision in McCulloch v. Maryland?

The McCulloch v Maryland ruling was an important one for several reasons. The state of Maryland decided to tax the federal bank. The bank refused to pay the tax, and the state of Maryland was sued. The lawyers for the bank argued that a state couldn’t tax a federal institution. Since the bank was a federal institution, the tax was, therefore, illegal.

The Supreme Court heard the case and agreed that Maryland’s action was unconstitutional. A state can’t tax a federal institution. Therefore, the bank didn’t have to pay the tax. However, there was one other very significant point made in the decision. The Supreme Court said that a loose view of the Constitution was legal. There was a big debate in our country if people or government had to follow the Constitution exactly as it was written or if the meaning could be interpreted. The Supreme Court’s ruling made a loose view of the Constitution legal. This meant the government would be free to do many more things since the Constitution does not spell out a lot of things the government can do.