[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes...
The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.Too vague?
How about....the 10th Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
"Prohibited by it to the States" means the States should not being suing the Federal Government in Federal Government court - they should just assert their Rights.
Madison thought the language of the 10th Amendment was, well, assumed, and that this didn't add anything. As originally drafted, it ended at "...respectively." Upon deliberation, the founders added "...or to the people."
Hamilton said in the Federalist Papers, "..the people...as the natural guardians of the Constitution..." and
As the people are the only legitimate fountain of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, under which the several branches of government hold their power, is derived, it seems strictly consonant to the republican theory, to recur to the same original authority, not only whenever it may be necessary to enlarge, diminish, or new-model the powers of the government . . . to the people themselves, who, as the grantors of the commissions, can alone declare its (the Constitution) true meaning, and enforce its observance?
Why are we then, leaving it up to the Supreme Court - which may appear poised to make the right decision...but then again:
...and Thomas Jefferson wrote, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."