Final answer:
As a strong federalist, John Marshall would interpret the Constitution in a way that favored a robust central government and broad constructionism, as evidenced by his rulings that established judicial review and strengthened federal authority.
Step-by-step explanation:
As a federalist, John Marshall, who served as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, would likely interpret the Constitution with a preference for a strong central government. Marshall's tenure was marked by decisions that emphasized the authority of the federal government and shaped the practice of judicial nationalism..
During the early 1800s, under the guidance of Marshall, the Supreme Court issued rulings that established its power at both the federal and state levels, notably in cases like Marbury v. Madison and Fletcher v. Peck. It is expected that Marshall, given his federalist leanings and his efforts to strengthen the federal government’s role, would favor interpretations of the Constitution that aligned with broad constructionism, meaning he would likely see the necessary and proper clause as a way to justify various implied powers of the federal government, such as regulating the economy and fostering national development.
Marshall’s approach significantly impacted the balance of power between the federal and state governments and solidified the principle of judicial review, allowing the Supreme Court to play a pivotal role in interpreting the Constitution and checking the powers of the other branches of government.