Hi there!
Because this question has been posted before, I'll post my previous response here.
The case of Gibbons v. Ogden was a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 1824 concerning the power of the states to regulate interstate commerce. This case involved a steamboat owner, Thomas Gibbons, who did business between New York and New Jersey and the then governor of New Jersey, Aaron Ogden. Gibbons argued that the monopoly Ogden had was a violation of the commerce clause of the Constitution and therefore not valid. This proved to be the case. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court decided that this law conflicted with federal law and the powers the federal government had to regulate interstate commerce. Under the Constitution, Congress has all powers necessary and proper to carry into effect the laws that it passes. This reinforced that clause.
<span>taxes are mandatory financial charges or some other
type of levy imposed upon taxpayers by a governmental organization in order to fund various public
expenditures.</span>
Answer:
um noo !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<span>The Roosevelt Corollary noted that European nations would not be allowed to interfere in the financial affairs of Latin American nations. In 1905, Roosevelt signed an Executive Order that would allow the US to collect on the debts of the Dominican Republic. The Senate felt that this was a usurpation of their authority to collect duties and taxes, and thereby pressed the administration to re-work the agreement, which was then released in 1905 in such form, but failed to receive the 2/3 vote necessary for ratification. After Roosevelt used the doctrine of modus vivendi to collect the duties, an acceptable treaty was drafted and ratified in early 1907.</span>
