Not exactly. The people created the federal government. Here's James Madison on the subject, from the Constitutional Convention:
"Mr. MADISON thought it clear that the Legislatures were incompetent to the proposed changes. These changes would make essential inroads on the State Constitutions, and it would be a novel & dangerous doctrine that a Legislature could change the constitution under which it held its existence. There might indeed be some Constitutions within the Union, which had given a power to the Legislature to concur in alterations of the federal Compact. But there were certainly some which had not; and in the case of these, a ratification must of necessity be obtained from the people.The States are not municipal sub-jurisdictions of the Federal governmentHe considered the difference between a system founded on the Legislatures only, and one founded on the people, to be the true difference between a league or treaty, and a Constitution. The former in point of moral obligation might be as inviolable as the latter. In point of political operation, there were two important distinctions in favor of the latter. 1. [FN12] A law violating a treaty ratified by a pre-existing law, might be respected by the Judges as a law, though an unwise or perfidious one. A law violating a constitution established by the people themselves, would be considered by the Judges as null & void. 2. [FN12] The doctrine laid down by the law of Nations in the case of treaties is that a breach of any one article by any of the parties, frees the other parties from their engagements. In the case of a union of people under one Constitution, the nature of the pact has always been understood to exclude such an interpretation. Comparing the two modes in point of expediency he thought all the considerations which recommended this Convention in preference to Congress for proposing the reform were in favor of State Conventions in preference to the Legislatures for examining and adopting it.
Actually, that's exactly what they are. And that's how the Federalists wanted it:
“A national government ought to be able to support itself without the aid or interference of the State governments, ...therefore it was necessary to have full sovereignty. Even with corporate rights the States will be dangerous to the national government, and ought to be extinguished, new modified, or reduced to a smaller scale.”-- Alexander Hamilton" I have well considered the subject, and am convinced that no amendment of the confederation can answer the purpose of a good government, so long as State sovereignties do, in any shape, exist.” -- Alexander Hamilton
"I apprehend the greatest danger is from the encroachment of the States on the national government”--James Madison
"Conceiving that an individual independence of the States is utterly irreconcileable with their aggregate sovereignty, and that a consolidation of the whole into one simple republic would be as inexpedient as it is unattainable, I have sought for middle ground, which may at once support a due supremacy of the national authority, and not exclude the local authorities wherever they can be subordinately useful."--James Madison
"Under the proposed Govt. the powers of the States will be much farther reduced. According to the views of every member, the Genl. Govt. will have powers far beyond those exercised by the British Parliament, when the States were part of the British Empire."-- James Madison, June 29, 1787
Huck, Huck, Huck.............
If only law was as clear as you wish it were.........
Without bothering to counter using any of a number of quotes from others, one simply has to point out that the States ratified the Constitution.
Why would such irrelevant entities have to go to the trouble of forming state conventions for the ratification of a document to create them as subdivisions? Does the baby create the mother?
Like all Hamiltonian groupies, you have it backwards. The States predated the Constitution; they collectively came together with representatives to re-negotiate the terms of their union ("...in order to form a more perfect...") and they did not negotiate away their own state sovereignty, no matter what Mr. Hamilton or his operator Mr. Marshall attempted to do with their own self serving chicanery.
Federal supremacy only applies to those areas granted to it. Federal laws which usurp those boundaries are null and void, usurpations, as even your hero Hamilton had to admit.