The first Supreme Court case to uphold the supremacy of the federal government over state governments was

The first Supreme Court case to uphold the supremacy of the federal government over state governments was Correct Answer McCulloch v. Maryland

The 1819 ruling in McCulloch v. Maryland established the implied powers of the national government; the authority of the federal government to act, the Court ruled, could come from the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution. Gibbons v. Ogden was an 1824 Court decision giving the power to regulate interstate commerce to Congress. Mapp v. Ohio was a 1961 decision stating that evidence found during "unreasonable searches and seizures" could not be used against a defendant. Betts v. Brady was a 1942 decision that stated the government didn't have to provide a lawyer in a state trial to a defendant who couldn't afford one (this was later overturned). Escobedo v. Illinois was a 1964 decision stating that suspects have a right to an attorney during interrogation.
Bissoy MCQ

Related Questions

A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court passes judgment in a matter. In a later case before a high court, a party presents the Supreme Court judgment as a binding authority. The opposing party claims that the high court is not bound by the Supreme Court's judgment because relevant provisions of law were not brought to the notice of the Supreme Court in that case. Which of the following is most correct in this case?
Principle: Article 141 of the Constitution provides that the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India.
Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed by three conclusions. Give answer :

Statement : The Central Government has directed the State Governments to reduce government expenditure in view of the serious resource crunch and it may not be able to sanction any additional grant to the states for the next six months.

Assumptions :
I. The State Governments are totally dependent on Central Government for its expenditures.
II. The Central Government has reviewed the expenditure account of the State Government.
III. The State Governments will abide by the directive.
Which of the following statements regarding the 'advisory jurisdiction of Supreme Court' is correct:
1. The opinion of Supreme Court may be sought by the President on any question of law or fact
2. In case the opinion of the Supreme Court is sought it is bound to give
3. The advice given by Supreme Court on matters referred to it is binding on the President
4. Advisory jurisdiction of Supreme Court can also be exercised over disputes arising out of references made over preconstitutional treaties
Consider the following statements:
1. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between the Government of India and one or more States.
2. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between the Government of India and any State or States on one side and one or more other State on the other.
3. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between the Government of India and any corporation of Individual one side and one or more States on the other.
4. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute between two or more States.
Which of these statements are correct?
Which of the following statements are correct? Answer by using the code given below:
1. Persons in Govt/Judicial service need not resign to participate in District judge selection process held in "Vijay Kumar Misra and another v. High Court of Judicature at Patna" by the Supreme Court of India
2. The Supreme Court of India held in S. Kazi v. Muslim Education Society that " All Tribunals are not necessary parties to the proceedings where legality of its orders challenged"
3. The Supreme Court of India observed in Cardanumom Marketing Corporation and others v. State of Kerala and others that Social Security to the legal profession becomes an essential part of legal system
4. The Supreme Court of India held in 'Union of India v. Rajasthan High Court and others that High Court judges are exempted from Airport frisking.
A seven member bench of the Supreme Court unanimously struck down clauses 2(d) of Article 323A and clause 3(d) of Article 323B of the Constitution relating to tribunals which excluded the jurisdiction of High Court and Supreme Court. The court held that power of judicial review over legislative action is vested in the High Court under Article 226 and in the Supreme Court under Article 32. This is an integral part of the basic structure of the constitution. Name the case:
Consider the following statements to answer this question.
1. Parliament cannot extend the jurisdiction and power of the Supreme Court.
2. No discussion can take place in Parliament with respect to the conduct of judge of the Supreme Court in discharge of the duties.
3. A retired judge of the Supreme Court cannot appear or plead in any court or before any authority within the territory of India.
4. The salaries and allowances of the Supreme Court are fixed by the Constitution and charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.
Which of these statement are correct?
S1: Governments are instituted among men to secure their certain inalienable rights.
P: Accordingly, men are more disposed to suffer than to right themselves by abolishing the forms of governments to which they are accustomed.
Q: But prudence will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes.
R: They derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and therefore, can also be changed by them.
S: But whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these rights of the people, it is their duty to throw off such a government.
S6: Such was the necessity which constrained the united colonies of America to give up their allegiance to the British Crown and declare themselves free and independent states.

The Proper sequence should be:
Consider the following statements:
1. The powers of High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are wider than those of Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
2. Both High Court and Supreme Court have concurrent power to enforce the fundamental rights.
3. It is mandatory for a petitioner first to approach the High Court instead of approaching the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of fundamental rights.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Consider the following statements.
1. The ruler of Porhat accepted the supremacy of the British in order to fulfill his own desire.
2. He wanted to establish his supremacy over Seraikela and Ranchi.
3. He wanted to get rid of Hos suppression.
Which of the statement(s) given above is/are correct?