Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The state argued the United States Constitution did not explicitly grant Congress the power to establish banks. In 1819, the Court decided against the state of Maryland. Chief Justice Marshall argued that Congress had the right to establish the bank, as the Constitution grants to Congress certain implied powers beyond those explicitly stated.
It purports to be an additional power, not a restriction on those already granted." [7] [8] Without that clause, there would have been a dispute about whether the express powers imply incidental powers, but the clause resolved that dispute by making those incidental powers be expressed, instead of implied. [8]
The Supreme Court has held that Congress has implied powers through the Commerce Clause. For example, in Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States and United States v. Darby Lumber Co., it was held that Congress could divide monopolies, prohibit child labor, and establish a minimum wage under the Commerce Clause.
The ICC's authority stemmed from the Interstate Commerce Act, the organic statute which gave the ICC life, and determined the extent of its powers. The Court considered two possible ways that Congress might vest the power to set rates in the ICC: expressly in the statute, or implied from the terms of the statute.
The powers of the president of the United States include those explicitly granted by Article II of the United States Constitution as well as those granted by Acts of Congress, implied powers, and also a great deal of soft power that is attached to the presidency. [1]
Regarding the Implied Powers of Congress, the Constitution specifically states all implied or additional powers permitted to the Congress are limited exclusively to the "Powers vested", to the Congress, "by this Constitution" (the Implied Powers Clause does not say, "the Powers vested in it"); meaning, whatever is not expressly written or ...
Congress’s oversight authority derives from its "implied" powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of checks and balances. Some scholars have questioned the efficacy of congressional oversight in ensuring bureaucratic performance and compliance with law. [2]
It has been said, by way of objection to a bill of rights ... that in the Federal Government they are unnecessary, because the powers are enumerated, and it follows, that all that are not granted by the constitution are retained; that the constitution is a bill of powers, the great residuum being the rights of the people; and, therefore, a bill ...