Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Dual Federalism Era
32
Dual Federalism
Why Is It Different Than Previous Era?
Definition
The system of dual/joint federalism in the United States is a product of the backlash against the Articles of Confederation, ratified in 1781, which established a very weak federal government with the powers to declare war, make treaties, and maintain an army.Fueled by Shays' Rebellion and an economy faltering under the inability of the federal government to pay the debt from the American Revolution, a group later known as the Federalists generated support for a strong central government and called for a Constitutional Convention in 1787 to reconsider the Articles.
Dual federalism is a political arrangement in which power is divided between the federal and state governments in clearly defined terms, with state governments exercising those powers accorded to them without interference from the federal government
Amendments Passed
Marble Cake Analogy
Layered Cake Analogy
To exercise powers neither delegated to the national government nor prohibited from the states by the Constitution as per Amendment X
Key People,Events,Movements, and Ideologies
Key Supreme Court Rulings
Shay's Rebellion revealed the outrage and disdain that the farmers obtained from the improper taxes imposed on them, this showed the weakness of the government at the time.
After Shay's Rebellion people realized that the government had to be reformed.
McCulloch v. Maryland,concerned the constitutionality of a federally chartered bank,which bankers and many legislators in Maryland opposed. Although the ability to charter a bank had not been explicitly granted to the federal government in the Constitution, federalist proponents argued such action as necessary for the federal government to exercise its constitutional power to “tax, borrow, and regulate interstate commerce.” Thus, the banks legitimacy was ensured by the Necessary and Proper Clause.
Gibbons v. Ogden- In 1808, the Fulton-Livingston Company had been granted exclusive steamboat rights by the New York legislature, who in turn had leased ferry rights within a portion of New York to Aaron Ogden. Ogden, citing the monopoly granted to him by the Fulton-Livingstone Company, had successfully prevented Thomas Gibbons from operating a ferry service between Manhattan and New Jersey.Chief Justice Marshall’s majority opinion sided with Gibbons, stating that Ogden's monopoly of the ferry service overstepped states’ ability to regulate trade. While the constitutionality of some aspects implied by the case remained vague, the decision once more reaffirmed the supremacy of federal law and diminished the power of state-sanctioned protectionism