Which description best captures Marshall's approach to constitutional interpretation?

• A. Strict constructionism
• B. Living Constitution
• C. Broad interpretation of the Constitution
• D. Original intent as sole guide

Answer: (C)

Marshall’s approach treats the Constitution as a framework that allows the federal government to act beyond what is explicitly written when doing so serves constitutional ends. He repeatedly used the idea of implied powers—drawing on the Necessary and Proper Clause—to justify actions not expressly listed in the text, while still reinforcing national supremacy over the states. A classic example is McCulloch v. Maryland, where he held that Congress could charter a national bank because it is a legitimate means to exercise its enumerated powers, and the states could not tax that institution. This shows a flexible, expansive reading of constitutional power aimed at strengthening the national government and enabling it to carry out its duties.

That broad interpretation stands in contrast to strict constructionism, which would confine federal power strictly to what is explicitly enumerated. It also differs from the Living Constitution's emphasis on evolving meanings over time and from original intent as the sole guide, which would anchor interpretation to what the framers meant or intended. The best fit for Marshall is the broad interpretation of the Constitution, with emphasis on implied powers and national authority.