Did John Marshall support a relatively broad interpretation of federal power?

Answer 1

Yes John Marshall was a nationalist; he emphasized the implied powers of Congress (meaning Congress wasn't restricted to a narrow interpretation of the Constitution, but could expand its power if need be). He also supported national law over state law.

Answer 2

Yes, Chief Justice Marshall supported states' rights, but only as granted in the Constitution (this means your test answer should probably be "no,"). The Marshall Court ruled some cases in favor of the states, particular when the federal question involved enforcing the Bill of Rights against the states, which was only intended to apply to the federal government at that time.

For the most part, Marshall, a member of the Federalist party, believed in strengthening the central government and subordinating individual states' powers to the United States when conflicts arose. Marshall's rulings on the relationship between the two entities appear well grounded in contemporary constitutional theory (much of which was being interpreted for the first time). The state and federal government shared power, but when state statutes and policies were in conflict with the the US Constitution, the Constitution, Federal Laws, and negotiated treaties superseded state sovereignty, per the Supremacy Clause in Article VI.

Many of the cases during the Marshall era involved the separation of powers between branches and other various states and territories, problems that naturally arose in the early years of the United States.

Answer 3

Yes, by today's standards.