Massucco 2. Mary Massucco. Professor Derosa. Pos4603 –

1661 WordsMay 2, 20177 Pages
Massucco 2 Mary Massucco Professor Derosa POS4603 – Final Paper 02 May 2017 Hamilton 's #78 The Federalist Papers are an insight into the federal court system of the United States through the interpretation of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Through their understanding of the federal court system, we are aided in making our own connections and analysis ' to better understand how the system works. More specifically, in Hamilton 's essay #78, he essentially claims that the federal judiciary isn 't given enough authority to properly do their job. He also makes note that the Supreme Court of the United States should have a substantial amount of power over the US Congress, but only in times when Congress has threatened the…show more content…
The case held that congress can create a bank and such laws if they deem them as necessary to the public. The case also saw the understanding that state laws cannot impede federal laws which have been provided by the Constitution. Furthermore, while states hold the power to tax, they do not surpass the laws created and allocated in the Constitution. These support Hamilton 's prediction because it concluded that Congress may enact laws when the laws have a purpose and prove to be a proper solution to an issue. However, though the federal government has ultimate authority, states are also granted their own powers to carry out within reason. State rights are owned by each separate state instead of by the federal government. However, in some cases, the federal government must intercede in the state 's affairs. In the case, Strauder v West Virginia a law was in place that allowed only whites to be placed on jury service. The case required federal intervention which held it as unconstitutional to bar someone from participating in societal duties merely on the basis of race. However, in Plessy v Ferguson, a man was arrested for refusing to move from the "white train car" to a "black train car". This case was found constitutional and in the rights of the states. This is due to the state 's demonstrating that the segregation mentioned in the case was abiding by the "separate but equal" clause, because both cars contained equal accommodations. Therefore,

    More about Massucco 2. Mary Massucco. Professor Derosa. Pos4603 –

      Open Document