1829, having been passed by the supreme court, under the leadership of John Marshall who was a VERY big government man, in 1924.
However, the side he came down on in the Maysville Road veto was that the Maysville Road was totally local and therefore federal funds should not be used for local issues. Then again, he may have opposed the bill simply because Henry Clay supported it and those men hated each other.
So perhaps by his veto of the Maysville Road bill, he was saying he did not agree with Gibbons v Ogden but like I said, to my knowledge, there is no record on how he felt about it (but I am sure he had an opinion because the man had opinions about EVERYTHING
Answer:
That’s it,” Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then U.S. ambassador to India, wrote to a colleague on the White House staff in 1973 on the subject of some issue of the moment. “Nothing will happen. But then nothing much is going to happen in the 1970s anyway.”
Explanation:
Answer: Antifederalists argued that a bill of rights was necessary because, the supremacy clause in combination with the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses would allow implied powers that could endanger rights. Federalists rejected the proposition that a bill of rights was needed.
Explanation:
What theory promoted by Stephen Douglas would allow the people of the territory to allow or for bid slavery? The state of nature i think
