How does Chief Justice John Marshall interpret the necessary
and proper clause

Two landmark decisions of the United States Supreme Court served to confirm the inferred constitutional authority for judicial review in the United States: in 1796, Hylton v. United States was the first case decided by the Supreme Court that involved a direct challenge to the constitutionality of an act of Congress, the Transportation Act of 1794 that imposed a "transportation tax." [2] The Court engaged in the judicial review process by examining the plaintiff's claim that the transportation tax was unconstitutional . After review, the Supreme Court decided that the Transportation Law was constitutional. In 1803, Marbury v. Madison [3] was the first Supreme Court case where the Court affirmed its authority for judicial review to nullify a statute as unconstitutional. At the end of his opinion on this decision, [4] Chief Justice John Marshall held that the Supreme Court's responsibility to overturn unconstitutional legislation was a necessary consequence of his oath of office to uphold the Constitution as indicated in Article Six of the Constitution.

on the whole, dickens has shown the french revolution and its this site might you. good at his job, and the subject matter he chose,