Final answer:
The notion that gambling contracts are inherently legal unless expressly prohibited by state law is typically false. Gambling is heavily regulated, and its legality varies by state. The necessary and proper clause of the Constitution actually has expanded federal authority, not limited it.
Step-by-step explanation:
In regard to the legality of gambling contracts, the statement that a gambling contract is legal unless it is specifically prohibited by state statute is typically false. In general, gambling laws are stringent, and most forms of gambling are regulated or prohibited unless they have been specifically authorized by state law. Certain forms of licensed and regulated gambling, like state lotteries or licensed casinos, are permitted in some areas. As a consequence, one should not assume that a gambling contract is legal by default; the legality heavily depends on the gambling laws of the particular state.
Regarding The Constitution and the necessary and proper clause, the information provided indicates that claim (a), that this clause has the effect of limiting the power of the national government, is false. Historically, the necessary and proper clause has been interpreted by the courts to grant Congress the flexibility to pass laws that are essential to carrying out its enumerated powers, which in effect has expanded, not limited, federal authority over time.