Description
A. What is the importance of McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316; give a summary of the case and its significance in your own words. Use the below outline for this information.
B. What is the importance of In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967). Use the below case outline/summary.
Use the following outline to summarize BOTH of these cases:
Give the case number/year, then:
1. FACTS: 2-3 sentences summarizing the important facts.
2. ISSUE: Usually there is only one issue in a case. It generally asks a constitutional question or raises a constitutional issue and set out why a case is important.
3. HOLDING: The holding generally answers the constitutional question raised or addresses the issue raised.
4. REASONING: (The most difficult part of the brief.) Explain why the court held or decided the way it did. It should be approximately 2-4 sentences.
5. CASE SIGNIFICANCE: 2+ sentences which will include the impact on law enforcement or corrections personnel.
Both A and B must be answered, including the below questions.
C. Name at least three federal courts that are not "constitutional" courts and their functions.
D. summarize this video:
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
Outline
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
RUNNING HEAD: COURT CASES
Court Cases
Student’s Name
Course Number- Name of Course
Instructor’s Name
Date
COURT CASES
2
Court Cases
Section A
FACTS: McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 was a case determined by the United States
Supreme Court. The state of Maryland introduced a tax on all bank notes that were not produced
in Maryland. At that particular time, only one bank was an out-of-state bank that is, the Second
Bank of the United States. The defendant was John James while the plaintiff was McCulloch
(McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819).
ISSUE: The constitutional question that the case attempted to answer was on the authority of the
action by the general assembly of Maryland, basing the argument on being unacceptable to the
constitution of the United States.
HOLDING: The decision was made that the State of Maryland’s decision to impose taxes on the
bank was unconstitutional and therefore the court voided the tax. The judge of the court Chief
Justic...
Review
Review
