Umm, Huck, you are too wrapped in bad law. “Constitutional Law” in the decades since 1937 is a perverted rebuke to “Constitution Law” before that. The Founders did mean that Conress only had 18 specific enumerated powers. They did not write or intent a hyper-inflatable commerce clause. (Plus those law perverters all seem to have ignored Article I, Section 9, part 6, which is ALSO a commerce clause.)
“Implied Powers”! Yes but that’s just modern idiot’s Dicta.
Only if you consider Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and John Marshall modern idiots.
"Implied powers" are those powers authorized by a legal document(from the Constitution) which, while not stated, are deemed to be implied by powers expressly stated. When George Washington asked Alexander Hamilton to defend the constitutionality of the measure against the protests of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph, Hamilton produced what has now become the classic statement for implied powers. Hamilton argued that the sovereign duties of a government implied the right to use means adequate to its ends. Although the United States government was sovereign only as to certain objects, it was impossible to define all the means which it should use, because it was impossible for the founders to anticipate all future exigencies. Hamilton noted that the "general welfare clause" and the "necessary and proper" clause gave elasticity to the constitution. Hamilton won the argument with Washington, who signed his Bank Bill into law.Even Hamilton's adversary, Thomas Jefferson, used the principle to justify his Louisiana PurchaseLouisiana Purchase in 1803. Later, directly borrowing from Hamilton, Chief Justice John Marshall invoked the implied powers of government in the court decision of McCulloch v. Maryland .
I got that synopsis from an online encyclopedia. You can look it up for more info if you like.