After about 1790 Madison was a negative influence. In other words, after Jefferson’s return he became unreliable.
Our greatest expositors of the constitution are Hamilton and Marshall two of the greatest legal minds ever created especially the former.
Compared to Jefferson, however, Madison was a constitutional whiz.
I find it much harder to defend Marshall though, with the exception of Barron v. Baltimore. His career was fraught with self-contradiction and politicized decision making. At times he was outright stupid, such as when he made the constitutionally absurd claim (along with Madison) in 1794 that the government did not have the power to impose an excise tax on carriages. Even his famous McCulloch ruling was a farce when the case is scrutinized. He quite literally had the AUTHOR of the supremacy clause in his courtroom during the case telling him exactly what was intended at the convention when it was written, but ignored him in favor of a contrary interpretation that meshed with his own political preferences at the time. Sadly most judges since then have followed Marshall's model of decisionmaking, hence the government we have today.
Here is Marshall during in Virginia's ratification convention [Link].
The state governments did not derive their powers from the general government; but each government derived its powers from the people, and each was to act according to the powers given it. Would any gentleman deny this? He demanded if powers not given were retained by implication. Could any man say so? Could any man say that this power was not retained by the states, as they had not given it away? For, says he, does not a power remain till it is given away?
Sounds similar to my Jefferson Davis Tenth Amendment quote above.