Question

how might the decision in mcculloch v. maryland make future supreme court decisions more complicated?
the court could spend more time interpreting the intent of the constitution rather than simply following it to the letter.
the principle of federal supremacy meant the court would more often rule in favor of federal powers over those of individual states.
the principle of federal supremacy meant the court would have to determine new limits on the federal government’s power.
the court could rule based on what it felt was right rather than basing its decisions on the constitution.

Explanation:

In McCulloch v. Maryland, the decision established the implied powers of Congress and federal supremacy. The first option is correct because the decision encouraged the Court to interpret the Constitution's intent (like using the Necessary and Proper Clause) rather than a strict literal reading. This interpretive approach adds complexity as future Courts would have to delve into intent, not just text. The second option is about federal vs. state power frequency, not complexity of decision - making. The third option is incorrect as the decision expanded federal power but didn't focus on new limits. The fourth option is wrong as the Court still bases decisions on the Constitution, just with more interpretation of intent.

Answer:

The Court could spend more time interpreting the intent of the Constitution rather than simply following it to the letter.