Congress can't mint money ?
Who knew ?
Or did you means something else.
Seriously. How do you expect anyone to buy your argument when you didn't make one ?
I have a lot of respect for your knowledge.
But to simply make this type of claim is insulting.
You didn't cite your source. I was insulting your source.
First, the Ninth Amendment probably encapsulates the conception of the Constitution as fully as the preamble. The conception, I agree, is that by "natural right" the denizens of the nation possess full freedom of action. They possess the right to do anything during their short and brutish lives. And that is why they constitute governments.
But, by entering into union, they preserve those rights as against each other by dint of
government action. I.e., those rights are, by enumeration, protected explicitly by the government. But, because of the limitations of human imagination, they acknowledged that there may be other rights that they hadn't thought of that should also be protected.
At the same time, the people of the United States transferred authority to their government to work
on their behalf to preserve their
general welfare and defend the nation
as a whole. That transfer of authority was not complete, but it was
robust. It was not unlimited, but it was
broad. They spoke in generalities to allow
flexibility in application, not to constrain the government to prevent it from doing its work and being successful.
Too many people with limited imaginations and ulterior motives seek to constrain that authority by a myriad of artifices. They talk in codes and euphemisms like "originalism" and "limited government" that are not consistent with the intent or aspirations of the framers. I'm not one of those people. You acknowledged that there are implied authorities included with those express ones. I agree. One cannot coin money without mints. One cannot build forts and needful structures without the ability to acquire property to place them on. "Dispose" in the Constitution did not mean only "get rid of," but the right to make decisions about
disposition, which includes acquisition.
The framers would be rightfully embarrassed by some of the ridiculous interpretations of their words as they have been espoused by some to prevent the government from functioning on the people's behalf. That is not what they envisioned, and both history and the courts have recognized that.