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.
Britain constrained the legislature to prop up ventures, this is the main consideration of area's financial development. Great Britain tries to recoup financially chose to nationalize a few enterprises. Great Britain's economy recouped less rapidly than the economy in West Germany.
The correct answer is the powers the constitution delegated to it.
During the development of the Constitution, the Anti-federalists were concerned about the size and power of the federal government. Many of these individuals were fearful that a strong federal government would become corrupt, just like Britiain's was before the colonists declared their independence. In order to prevent a tyrannical central government, the Anti-federalists proposed having the federal government only having the powers specifically given to them in the US Constitution.
