"The Constitution, as she has always understood it, as is plain to all who can read it, was a compact between certain States, providing for the establishment of a general government for certain purposes which are expressly prescribed, and stipulating that all rights not granted to the general government are reserved to the States and the people respectively. By ratifying the Constitution, the original States became united in a political partnership, and as voluntary partners they have shared all the privileges and burdens, all the responsibilities and duties, of such, a connection. The Constitution contains no provision for extending the partnership, except so far as to authorize the formation of new States within the limits of the original States or of the territory belonging to them collectively; and it clearly was not contemplated or desired that the question of enlarging the common country should be considered or decided in any other manner than as a question to be submitted, like that upon the adoption of the Constitution, to the people of all the States. The attempt, therefore, on the part of the general government in any of its branches, to enlarge the country, is regarded by Massachusetts as an invasion of the reserved rights of the States and the people, and thus a violation of the Constitution."
--Stephen C. Phillips, "Speech: The Constitution, the Union, the Government," 1846

Ah, Massachusetts then and now. What a difference 150+ years makes. And like Massachusetts, most of the states have been more than glad to feed at the ever-expanding Federal teat and allow for state sovereignty to evaporate via a transfer (or usurpation) of their authority. There seems to be only a handful of states today that believe what the tenth amendment denotes.