The War on Drugs has been very effective in that regard.
1. The case where they held that peyote-smoking of Indians in religious settings was under the jurisdiction of Congress.
2. The "prohibited persons" amendment to NFA. (It might be GCA, I get the two confused.)
4. Eroded to almost nothing, Kentucky v. King shows how little regard it's held in the judiciary. ("Terrorists!" didn't help; thanks NSA.)
5. Like #4, eroded to almost nothing. ("Officer Safety" is used as justification for what often boils down to summary execution.)
[Our police tend to be trained to escalate situations, not deescalate; combined with an us vs. them
attitude and of course things are messy.]
6. Arguably undermined by accusations being slung by the prosecutor, certainly undermined by the judiciary's propensity to prohibit excuse potential jurors that believe (a) that the Constitution is superior to normal legislation, and/or (b) that jurors can judge the law as well as facts [and therefore nullify].
7. Civil asset forfeiture.
8. Absurdly long sentences. (IMO, "life" [or 20 yrs (1/4 avg lifespan)] is far more inhumane than simple death.)
9. Ties into #4/#5 — the violation of unenumerated rights (like travel) is used to excuse violations of enumerated rights (like being secure in your papers and possessions).
10. The oft-cited saying federal laws trump state laws
is pushed because it preserves federal power; via Wickard they claim that the congress can regulate intrastate commerce, and even non-commerce, which is the basis of the War on Drugs.
That's 90% of the amendments if the Bill of Rights undermined by the War on Drugs.