Question

thomas jefferson, opinion on the constitutionality of the bill for establishing a national bank (1791)
i consider the foundation of the constitution as laid on this ground that “all powers not delegated to the u.s. by the constitution, not prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people” tenth amendment. to take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.
the incorporation of a bank, and other powers assumed by this bill have not, in my opinion, been delegated to the u.s. by the constitution. they are not among the powers specially enumerated...
they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare. ...giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. it would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase that of instituting a congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the united states; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please and this can never be permitted.

1. name at least two main reasons that jefferson gave for not interpreting the powers of congress broadly.

Explanation:

Jefferson cited the Tenth Amendment, stating powers not delegated to the U.S. by the Constitution and not prohibited to the states are reserved. He also argued that broad - interpretation would render the enumerated powers useless and give Congress unrestricted power, including the ability to do evil as they are the sole judges of what is good or evil.

Answer:

1. The Tenth Amendment restricts Congress's powers to those specifically delegated.
2. Broad interpretation would make enumerated powers meaningless and give Congress unrestricted power including the power to do evil.