The United States v. The State Bank of North Carolina was a Supreme Court case that dealt with the constitutionality of state-chartered banks and their ability to issue notes as currency. At issue in this case was whether Congress had the power to charter a national bank, or if such authority rested solely with the states. The court held that while Congress did have some limited powers over banking, it could not create its own bank without violating constitutional principles of federalism and separation of powers between state and federal governments. Furthermore, it ruled that states were free to chart their own banks so long as they complied with all applicable laws regarding banking practices. Ultimately, this decision affirmed the right for states to establish their own financial institutions without interference from Washington D.C., thus preserving an important aspect of American democracy: local control over economic matters within each individual state's borders

In the United States v. The State Bank of North Carolina, Chief Justice Marshall delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that Congress had no authority to create corporations and thus could not charter the bank. He believed that such power was reserved for the states under their police powers and that it would be unconstitutional for Congress to exercise this power without an amendment to the Constitution. Furthermore, he argued that if Congress did have such authority then it should be exercised with caution as any act of incorporation by Congress would grant them too much control over state affairs. In conclusion, Chief Justice Marshall maintained his belief in strict constructionism and held firm on his stance against federal encroachment into matters traditionally left up to individual states' discretion.