The 10th states (my emphasis / paraphrasing in parenthesis)..."The powers not delegated" (written down in the constitution as we the people have authorized delegation thereof) "to the United States" (powers are given to the people whom formed the governance of the state's, uniting to form the USA governmental force) "by the Constitution," (the granting document controlling the powers not written down - future powers) "nor prohibited by it to the states,"(Read - nor prohibited by the constitution to the states - which is restrictive in nature and they are saying that congress can't acquire any power from that which is already prohibited) "are reserved to the States respectively,"(the future powers not written down yet belong to the State's equally when in reference to States) "or to the people."(when the state's have overstepped their bounds or authority, it is up to the people to correct the error and the burden of duty is equal among the people of the state's, respectfully.)
I'd love a lawyers response to this argument!
I'm not licensed yet but I'll bite. First I need some clarification though.
First I am interested in your proposition that any amendment subsequent to the 10th must "pass through" the 10th. Any amendment that is passed effectively becomes part of the Constitution, and may modify it in any way. If the 10th prospectively limited further amendments, then there would be almost no further power to amend because the plain language of the 10th purports to "divvy up" all powers. It would be an absurd result.
10th without my commentary
"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."
While it seems true to say that any amendment may modify any part of the constitution (otherwise what's the point in amendments), it's prudent to state the rules of creating an amendment are found in Article 5 of which the 10th didn't violate until the 16th amendment was born.
It would seem prudent to say that anything created from the constitution may not be in conflict with itself pursuant Article 6 (rules of validity) as well.
So right after congress drafted the rules for amendments (Article 5), they discussed and drafted which rules would apply as sovereign...the answer is the Constitution proper...Article 5 is older than the 10th Amendment and the 16th...It should have more clout and I agree that it is absurd...