Hamilton believed that the federal government had powers to do whatever was "necessary and proper" in exercising leadership beyond its specifically enumerated powers.
A key example was Hamilton's argument for the creation of a national bank, which was not specifically stipulated by the Constitution. Hamilton's argument was based on the "necessary and proper" clause of Article I, Section 8, of the United States Constitution. After enumerating a number of the powers of Congress, including borrowing money, coining money, regulating commerce, etc, Section 8 of Article I closes with by saying Congress shall have power "to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Hamilton favored a loose interpretation of the Constitution -- in other words, that the Constitution allows for anything that is not strictly forbidden in what it has expressly stated. A national bank was not strictly listed as something Congress could establish, but there was nothing in the Constitution to prohibit it. And the "necessary and proper" clause gave leeway to create it.
Overall, Hamilton favored a stronger federal government than did some of his peers among the founding fathers.
Answer:
I think it stands for Type Origin Motive Audience Content
In the case,Texas v.Johnson,the texas court tried and convicted Mr.Johnson for violating the statute that prohibited the desecration of venerated objects e.g the American flag that could arouse anger in other individuals.Johnson appealed with the argument that the actions were a "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment.
Texas laws punishes actions such as flag burning that might arouse anger in other but it this case the outrage alone couldnot justify for supressing Johnson's freedom of speech.In this perspective,the Texas law discriminated upon view point in that though it punishes such actions,it still specifically exempt prosecution of actions with similar defination such as burning or burying of worn-out flag.
Therefore, flag burning in Texas v.Johnson constituted a symbolic speech and is protected by the Firts Amendment.
Normandy landing part of WWII. However you could just call it Normandy Landing. Hope this helps.
Answer:
Oil equipment company
Explanation:
I'm confident in this answer
