The 9th Amendment prohibits the central government (not the states) from misconstruing the main body of the Constitution. For instance, the feds (not states) can't make laws against alcohol, weed, or slavery and say the Constitution doesn't say you can drink alcohol, smoke weed, or own slaves. Get it?
The 10th says that it's constitutional for a state to prohibit, or allow, anything it wants to so long as the power doesn't conflict with the Constitution.
States powers can extend anywhere they wish it to unless, or until, it conflicts with the Constitution. There is no such restriction when it comes to mind altering substances.
James Madison in Federalist No. 45: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
Yep.. Some powers are "prohibited by it [the Constitution] to the States". See the 10th.
-- The BOR's enumerates some of those prohibited powers , but does not deny that there are "others retained by the people".
See the 9th Amendment.
The 9th Amendment prohibits the central government (not the states) from misconstruing the main body of the Constitution.
It says:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
Nothing in there specifying States or central government, - thus it applies to ALL government at any level.
Just as our enumerated RKBA's, -- unenumerated rights are not to be infringed upon, denied or disparaged. -- Get it?
For instance, the feds (not states) can't make laws against alcohol, weed, or slavery and say the Constitution doesn't say you can drink alcohol, smoke weed, or own slaves. Get it?
Yep, I 'get' your prohibitionistic zeal. Sad.
The 10th says that it's constitutional for a state to prohibit, or allow, anything it wants to so long as the power doesn't conflict with the Constitution.
It gives no prohibitory power to states. Do you agree that Calif can prohibit assault weapons, thus conflicting with our 2nd Amendment?
States powers can extend anywhere they wish it to unless, or until, it conflicts with the Constitution. There is no such restriction when it comes to mind altering substances.
'Reasonable regulations' can be made on restricting substance abuse. -- On that we agree.
Fiat prohibitions are not reasonable, and violate our rights to due process.