I think the answer is C. Hope this helps!
Answer:
D. a loose interpretation of the Constitution could be used to increase federal power.
Explanation:
John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1801 till his death in 1835. Without any prior study in law, he studied law in only just six weeks.
Under Supreme Court's decision under Chief Justice John Marshall upheld Alexander Hamilton's interpretation of the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton advocated broad and liberal interpretation of the Constitution. This belief was upheld by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall. The Supreme Court uphelded a loose and liberal interpretation of the Constitution could be used to increase federal power.
Therefore, option D is correct.
Answer:
"Opponents of the War Powers Resolution have traditionally claimed that clause 11 confers upon Congress only a narrow piece of war power. Defenders of the Resolution have argued in contrast that the Resolution constitutes an exercise of congressional authority under the clause. This last contention pokes at the truth without quite striking it. The War Powers Resolution is not constitutional as an exercise of the war power. It is constitutional because it defines the war power. The War Powers Resolution is nothing more or less than a congressional definition of the word "war" in article I. A definition of this kind coupled with a reasonable enforcement mechanism is well within the power of Congress under a proper understanding of the constitutional system of checks and balances. The definition does not intrude on any presidential prerogative. The mechanisms chosen by Congress to enforce the provisions of the Resolution were reasonable in 1973 and, although matters have been complicated by the United States Supreme Court's decision late last Term in Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha, those mechanisms remain reasonable today."
Explanation:
No political power can supersede it, and the independent judiciary, rather than the elected legislature, serves as its interpreter. Far from a threat to popular will, a separate judicial branch was designed to guarantee democratic freedoms by preventing the concentration of power in government.
