This book analyzes nine Supreme Court decisions that dealt primarily with money, monetary events, and monetary policy, from McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819 to the Gold Clause Cases in 1934-35. In doing so, it explains how both the gold standard and central bank work, how the former gave way to the latter, and how the Federal Reserve became unconstitutional.

This book reviews nine Supreme Court cases and decisions that dealt with monetary laws and gives a summary history of monetary events and policies as they were affected by the Court's decisions. Several cases and decisions had notable consequences on the monetary history of the United States, some of which were blatant misjudgments stimulated by political pressures. The cases included in this book begin with McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819 and end with the Gold Clause Cases in 1934–5. Constitutional Money examines three institutions that were prominent in these decisions: the Supreme Court, the gold standard and the Federal Reserve System. The final chapter describes the adjustments necessary to return to a gold standard and briefly examines the constitutional alternatives.

This book traces the history from colonial times to the present of the monetary powers exercised by the Congress under the Constitution. It follows the evolution of the American banking and monetary system from the perspective of specific provisions in the Constitution that authorize the government to coin money and regulate its value. The author critically examines how far the development of the contemporary money and banking system has pushed beyond the narrow powers spelled out in the Constitution. He shows how changes in congressional legislation, Supreme Court decisions on precedent-setting cases, and the evolution of central banking powers within the Federal Reserve System have expanded the scope of the federal government's monetary powers. Yet, the author views this history within the context of private limits to the authority of Congress and the Congress's distrust of lodging the central bank within the Executive branch, preferring instead to respect an independent central banking tradition. The Hamiltonian tradition, he concludes, still offers the best institutional arrangement to confront unstable markets and destabilizing political influence.

Over 50 years ago, In Search of a Monetary Constitution, which focused on the need for constraints on the creation of money by the government, was published. Although overlooked at the time, the work's analysis has proven to be remarkably prescient. This new collection of essays, Renewing the Search for a Monetary Constitution: Reforming Government's Role in the Monetary System, commemorates the 50th anniversary of the first edition by revisiting and re-energizing the original intent. Since the publication of the original book, central banks have delivered neither sound money nor real growth; instead, chronic inflation and a series of booms and busts have prevailed. In this new collection, scholars call for monetary reform centered on the debate over creating constitutional provisions that empower government versus provisions that prohibit government interference with money. The aim of Renewing the Search for a Monetary Constitution is to revitalize public discussion of constitutional monetary reform. It's a must-read for anyone who wants to change the domination of our monetary system by the government.

"A brilliant collection of essays on one of the most important contemporary constitutional issues: when can and should the government be able to regulate campaign spending? Each essay offers original insights, and together they are a superb examination of the intersection of politics and constitutional law. If there is to be a new jurisprudence in this area, this book is likely its foundation."--Erwin Chemerinsky, founding dean, School of Law, University of California-Irvine In the U.S. Supreme Court case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, five justices ruled that corporations and unions had a constitutional right to spend unlimited sums in elections. In so doing, they overturned decades of precedent and dozens of laws. The ruling earned banner headlines, a sharp State of the Union rebuke, and public disapproval hovering near 80 percent in the polls. In the 2010 election that followed, independent spending spiked, much of it done secretly. The decision ranks among the Court's most controversial and consequential. This volume is an attempt to map out the complex labyrinth that led to Citizens United and to explore where this decision may lead. The chapters in it arose from a symposium sponsored by NYU's Brennan Center for Justice just nine weeks after the Citizens United decision was announced.