How does this document challenge or expand the information you read in the textbook? (this is talking about shays' rebellion)

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

The document challenges or expands the information you read in the textbook in that it offers a different perspective of what happened during Shay's Rebellion. We find information in the textbook that refers to the vulnerability of the Articles of Confederation and the limited action of the central government to react against what was happening in Massachusetts during the revolts. Truly there was not a strong army to confront the rebellion. Congress did not have much power because the states were sovereign and they were the ones that could collect money through taxes. However, the document gives other perspective and refer to opinions such as the ones of Thomas Jefferson regarding the possibility of people to express their opinions as part of the growth of a country.

b) a state law could be declared illegal if it contradicted the constitution.

explanation:

the conflict of this case originated when james w. mcculloch, a cashier of the baltimore branch of the second bank of the united states that the congress had chartered in 1816, refused to pay a tax imposed by the maryland state.

in the case, the state of maryland appealed that the establishment of a second bank was unconstitutional since the constitution didn't say anything about granting that power to congress. however, the case determined that even if such right wasn't specifically stated in the constitution, it was part of the "implied powers" of the government enunciated in article i, section 8.

the case also eliminated maryland's legislation to impose taxes to a national bank, asserting that even though the states retained the power of taxation, the constitution's laws are supreme and can not be controlled by the states, therefore, if a state law contradicts the constitution, it should be declared illegal.

explanation: