liberty wrote:What other purpose could the tenth amendment have if not to limit the power of the federal government?
Yes, the Tenth Amendment states a limit of the powers of the US government. For that matter, it also states a limit on the powers of the State governments.
But the first point is that the Tenth Amendment
REstates those limits.
Those limits are already in the Constitution. Those limits would exist, even if the Tenth Amendment had never been enacted.
The second point is that the Tenth Amendment tells us nothing about what powers the US government has, and what powers the US government does not have. It tells us nothing about what powers the State governments have, and what powers the State governments do not have.
It tells us that the US government has only the powers which it has.
That is not constitutional rocket science.
It tells us that the State governments do not have the powers which they do not have.
That is not constitutional rocket science either.
And one does not need the Tenth Amendment to reach either of those dizzyingly obvious conclusions.
The hard part comes when:
--> The US government claims that it has the power to do X;
--> Someone claims that the US government does not have the power to do X; and
--> Someone else (typically the US Supreme Court) must decide whether the US government does or does not have the power to do X.
The Tenth Amendment is of no help in answering that question.
If the US government claims that it has the power to do X by virtue of the Commerce Clause, then the answer to whether the US government has the power to do X depends on the meaning of the Commerce Clause.
The Tenth Amendment gives us no guidance. The Tenth Amendment tells us that if X is within the US government's power pursuant to the Commerce Clause, then the US government has the power to do X. And the Tenth Amendment tells us that if X is not within the US government's power pursuant to the Commerce Clause (or some other clause, if someone makes a claim based on some other clause), then the US government does not have the power to do X.
But the Tenth Amendment tells us nothing about the fundamental question:
Does the US government have the power -- pursuant to the Commerce Clause or any other clause -- to do X? Or does the US government not have the power -- pursuant to the Commerce Clause or any other clause -- to do X?
The Tenth Amendment tells us nothing -- and I mean, quite literally, nothing -- which answers that question.
To answer that question, we must look at the Commerce Clause. And for simplicity's sake, let's assume that no one has made any claim based on any other clause.
If the US government has the power, pursuant to the Commerce Clause, to do X, then, pursuant to the Tenth Amendment, doing X is one of the powers delegated to the US.
And if the US government does not have the power, pursuant to the Commerce Clause, to do X, then, pursuant to the Tenth Amendment, doing X is not one of the powers delegated to the US.
As to whether the US government does or does not have the power, pursuant to the Commerce Clause, to do X, the Tenth Amendment is entirely irrelevant.
Serious question on my part: Am I making this clear? Or am I just running on about it? Or both?
-------------------------
Edited to correct "party" to "part".