I'll let you take it up with Justice Thomas:
U.S. Supreme Court Nos. 95-1478 and 95-1503
JAY PRINTZ, SHERIFF/CORONER, RAVALLI COUNTY, MONTANA, PETITIONER 95-1478 v. UNITED STATES RICHARD MACK, PETITIONER 95-1503
on writs of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit[June 27, 1997]
Justice Thomas, concurring.The Court today properly holds that the Brady Act violates the Tenth Amendment in that it compels state law enforcement officers to "administer or enforce a federal regulatory program." See ante, at 25. Although I join the Court's opinion in full, I write separately to emphasize that the Tenth Amendment affirms the undeniable notion that under our Constitution, the Federal Government is one of enumerated, hence limited, powers. See, e.g., McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 405 (1819) ("This government is acknowledged by all to be one of enumerated powers"). "[T]hat those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written." Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 176 (1803). Accordingly, the Federal Government may act only where the Constitution authorizes it to do so. Cf. New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992). [snipped]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&court=US&case=/us/000/95%2D1478.html
That is quite a stretch to claim that Thomas's opinion is in contradiction to Madison's. It isn't.
Thomas is referring to the separation of state powers from federal powers, the doctrine of federalism. This doctrine gives the federal government no power over state administrations if they are not in violation of the constitution. It has nothing to do with expanding the 10th merely states that control over state and local matters is within the power of states not the feds.
Limiting the power of the feds within states does not expand that of the States outside that recognized by the Constitution.