Steven Schwinn -- a law professor at John Marshall Law School and Constitution expert -- says that the amendment is too vague to be used as an argument for state sovereignty on key issues such as economic recovery, marijuana laws and same-sex marriage. ... "To say that the 10th Amendment somehow empowers states or gives them state sovereignty is just reading way too much into the text," he said. "The 10th Amendment just can't bear that weight."
Uh professor Schwinn, do you know where your Law School is located? Yes professor that's right, Chicago, IL. And professor do you know 'what' Chicago is? (wheels now spinning in Schwinn's head) NO? Well let me clue you in -- Chicago is a: Home Rule City.
That means mr Law Professor that Chicago has its own separate laws and is basically a mini version of a state, like IL is to the Federal Government. Chicago can and has passed a gazillion (legal term) laws that are much more restrictive than what's contained in the State Laws or in the IL Constitution. And Chicago doesn't have a 10th Amendment 'right' to do any of it. Chicago lackeys in Springfield just passed 'a law' and that was that. To get technical, Chicago seceded from Illinois and rules itself as it sees fit.
So don't give me any 'States don't have sovereignty or any 10th Amendment Rights', professor asshat. If Chicago can be sovereign from the State of IL, IL can be sovereign from the Fed.
State sovereignty is to a liberal like garlic to a vampire.
State sovereignty completely destroys the whole liberal/fascist agenda,
because they can’t control a [technically] seceded state.