Final answer:
Punitive damages are typically not available in contract actions, and this statement is false. The necessary and proper clause expands the national government's power, making the exercise's statement false. In defamation cases involving public officials, the 'actual malice' standard is required for the official to recover damages.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that punitive damages are usually available in contract actions where actual damages are hard to determine is false. In most contract cases, the remedy is to put the injured party in the position they would have been had the contract been fulfilled, which usually involves compensatory damages rather than punitive damages. Punitive damages are primarily awarded in tort cases to punish the defendant for particularly egregious behavior and to deter similar conduct in the future, not in contract disputes.
Regarding the exercise provided, the necessary and proper clause, also known as the elastic clause, of the U.S. Constitution actually expands the power of the national government by granting Congress the authority to pass all laws necessary and proper for carrying out the enumerated powers. Therefore, the statement that the necessary and proper clause has had the effect of limiting the power of the national government is false.
The constitutional guarantees reference regarding a public official and defamatory falsehood talks about a standard set in cases involving defamation of public officials. The standard, known as "actual malice," requires that the plaintiff, who is a public official, must prove that the defamatory statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.