Which of the following is an implied power of Congress

Under the Constitution, Congress has both specific and implied powers. These powers have been expanded through the amendment process as well as by Congress's own legislative action. Moreover, both houses are granted authority in certain areas. 

Specific powers

Congress is given 27 specific powers under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution. These are commonly known as the enumerated powers, and they cover such areas as the rights to collect taxes, regulate foreign and domestic commerce, coin money, declare war, support an army and navy, and establish lower federal courts. In addition, Congress can admit new states to the Union (Article IV, Section 3), propose amendments to the Constitution (Article V), collect federal income taxes (Sixteenth Amendment), and enforce protection and extension of civil rights (Thirteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, Twenty-third, Twenty-fourth, and Twenty-sixth amendments). 

Implied powers

Implied powers are not stated directly in the Constitution. They derive from the right of Congress to make all laws "necessary and proper" to carry out its enumerated powers. Located at the end of Article I, Section 8, this sentence is often called the elastic clause because it stretches the authority of Congress. The Supreme Court upheld the concept of implied powers in the landmark case McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), ruling that the federal government had the right to establish a national bank under the power delegated to Congress to borrow money and control commerce. A more recent example of implied powers is the War Powers Act of 1973, which limited the ability of the president to send American troops into combat without consulting and notifying Congress. 

Limitations on the powers of Congress

The Constitution lists powers that are denied to Congress (Article I, Section 9). The Bill of Rights prohibits Congress from making laws that limit individual liberties. Under the system of checks and balances, the president can veto a law passed by Congress, or the Supreme Court can declare a law unconstitutional. Voters can ignore unpopular laws and press for their repeal, as happened with the Eighteenth Amendment establishing Prohibition. 

[The 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.

[The 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.

Longstanding Supreme Court precedent recognizes Congress as having “plenary” power over immigration, giving it almost complete authority to decide whether foreign nationals ( “aliens,” under governing statutes and case law) may enter or remain in the United States. Footnote
Kleindienst v. Mandel, 408 U.S. 753, 766 (1972) ( “The Court without exception has sustained Congress' 'plenary power to make rules for the admission of aliens and to exclude those who possess those characteristics which Congress has forbidden.'” ) (quoting Boutilier v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 387 U.S. 118, 123 (1967)); Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. Stranahan, 214 U.S. 320, 343 (1909) (noting the “plenary power of Congress as to the admission of aliens” and “the complete and absolute power of Congress over the subject” of immigration); see also Galvan v. Press, 347 U.S. 522, 531 (1954) ( “Policies pertaining to the entry of aliens and their right to remain here are peculiarly concerned with the political conduct of government. . . . But that the formulation of these policies is entrusted exclusively to Congress has become about as firmly imbedded in the legislative and judicial tissues of our body politic as any aspect of our government.” ). But while Congress's power over immigration is well established, defining its constitutional underpinnings is more difficult. The Constitution does not mention immigration, but parts of the Constitution address related subjects. The Supreme Court has sometimes relied upon Congress's powers over naturalization (the term and conditions in which an alien becomes a U.S. citizen), Footnote
See U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 4 (Naturalization Clause); Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 394–95 (2012); Immigration & Naturalization Serv. v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 940 (1983); but see Arizona, 567 U.S. at 422 (Scalia, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) ( “I accept [federal immigration law] as a valid exercise of federal power—not because of the Naturalization Clause (it has no necessary connection to citizenship)” ). foreign commerce, Footnote
See U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3 (Foreign Commerce Clause); Toll v. Moreno, 458 U.S. 1, 10 (1982); United States ex rel. Turner v. Williams, 194 U.S. 279, 290 (1904) (citing Foreign Commerce Clause as a source of immigration power). and, to a lesser extent, upon the executive branch's implied Article II foreign affairs power, Footnote
See United States ex rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 537, 542 (1950) (relying on foreign affairs power as source of executive power to exclude aliens). as sources of federal immigration power. Footnote
Discussions of the source of congressional immigration power sometimes also mention the power to declare war, U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 11, and the Migration and Importation Clause, id. § 9, cl. 1; which barred Congress from outlawing the slave trade before 1808. See Michael Scaperlanda, Partial Membership: Aliens and the Constitutional Community, 81 Iowa L. Rev. 707, 726 n.95 (1996). While these powers continue to be cited as supporting the immigration power, since the late 19th century, the Supreme Court has described the power as flowing from the Constitution's establishment of a federal government. Footnote
Ping v. United States, 130 U.S. 581, 609 (1889) (upholding law that prohibited the return to the United States of Chinese laborers who had been issued, before their departure from the United States and under a prior law, certificates entitling them to return, and recognizing “[t]he power of exclusion of foreigners” as “an incident of sovereignty belonging to the government of the United States as a part of those sovereign powers delegated by the constitution” ). The United States government possesses all the powers incident to a sovereign, including unqualified authority over the nation's borders and the ability to determine whether foreign nationals may come within its territory. Footnote
See Trump v. Hawaii, No. 17-965, slip op. at 30 (U.S. June 26, 2018) ( “For more than a century, this Court has recognized that the admission and exclusion of foreign nationals is a 'fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government's political departments.'” ) (quoting Fiallo v. Bell, 430 U.S. 787, 792 (1977)); Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21, 32 (1982) ( “[T]he power to admit or exclude aliens is a sovereign prerogative.” ); Mandel, 408 U.S. at 765 (relying upon “ancient principles of the international law of nation-states” ); Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580, 588–89 (1952) (the “traditional power of the Nation over the alien” is “a power inherent in every sovereign state” ); Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 142 U.S. 651, 659 (1892) ( “It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty, and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.” ); see also Arizona, 567 U.S. at 394–95 (relying upon the Naturalization Clause and the “inherent power as sovereign to control and conduct relations with foreign nations” ); Ex rel. Turner, 194 U.S. at 290 (relying on “the accepted principle of international law, that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions,” and upon the foreign commerce power). The Supreme Court has generally assigned the constitutional power to regulate immigration to Congress, with executive authority mainly derived from congressional delegations of authority. Footnote
See Galvan v. Press, 347 U.S. 522, 530 (1954) ( “Policies pertaining to the entry of aliens and their right to remain here are peculiarly concerned with the political conduct of government. In the enforcement of these policies, the Executive Branch of the Government must respect the procedural safeguards of due process. Butthat the formulation of these policies is entrusted exclusively to Congress has become about as firmly imbedded in the legislative and judicial tissues of our body politic as any aspect of our government.” ) (internal citations omitted).

What are the implied powers of Congress quizlet?

Terms in this set (6).
Lay and collect taxes. Punish tax evaders..
Borrow money. Establish federal reserve system of banks..
Create naturalization laws. Regulate and limit immigration..
Raise armies and a navy. Draft Americans into military..
Regulate commerce. Establish minimum wage..
Establish post office. Prohibit mail fraud..

What is an example of Congress using implied powers?

As an example of implied power, Congress passed laws on national health care based on the Constitution's authority to collect taxes for the common defence and general welfare, which are meant to protect the rights of the United States.

What are the five implied powers of Congress?

316, 407 (1819) (considering whether Congress's powers to lay and collect taxes; to borrow money; to regulate commerce; to declare and conduct a war; and to raise and support armies and navies implied the power to establish a national bank under the Necessary and Proper Clause); Juilliard v.