Here are some of the things that McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden had in common:
* Both cases dealt with the conflict between federal and state laws. In McCulloch v. Maryland, the federal government had chartered a bank that the state of Maryland attempted to tax. In Gibbons v. Ogden, the state of New York had granted a monopoly over steamboat navigation that conflicted with a federal law regulating interstate commerce.
* Both cases were ultimately decided in favor of the federal government. The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government had the right to charter a bank and that the state of Maryland could not tax it. The Court also ruled that the federal government had the power to regulate interstate commerce and that the state of New York's monopoly was unconstitutional.
* Both cases helped to establish the principle of federal supremacy. This principle means that federal laws take precedence over state laws whenever there is a conflict between the two. The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government had the power to overrule state laws that interfered with its ability to perform its constitutional functions.
* Both cases helped to expand the power of the federal government. By establishing the principle of federal supremacy, the Supreme Court allowed the federal government to become more active in regulating the economy and other aspects of American life. This trend toward increasing federal power would continue throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden were two of the most important cases in American constitutional history. They helped to define the role of the federal government in the American system of federalism, and they laid the foundation for the United States to become a more powerful and prosperous nation.