I’ll try to remember to tag you when I do that more detailed writeup.

I completely disagree with your premise and explanation of the constitution and its standing. as the supreme law of the land; All law must fit into it and not violate it. Its primary function is to limit government duties and power, and frame its operations, its second function is to notify the citizen of its limits on government including the 10th thst states thst the state and the citizen have the final say. Supreme above the state is the individual who is not controlled by any manner but his conscience. It was hoped a man would frame his conscience with Gods Word which is the supreme law of the world weather people want to believe that or not.

By Natural Law, all of them.

The concept of "will" intrinsically includes freedom, AKA the only will that exists is "free will." All individuals have free will by Natural Law.

From the DOI:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The people who created the Constitution fully understood that all individuals are only beholden to (limited by) Natural Laws. Any government that attempts to subvert those Natural Laws, or call itself the "Sovereign" of the individual is fraudulent.

"Sovereign" means "Ultimate Authority." All individuals are the Ultimate Authority of their Jurisdiction. A group of people (such as a government) is, if they work in concert, only working within the Jurisdiction of the sum of the people acting in concert. The Jurisdiction becomes "larger" only in the sense that each individual is acting in concert, and the resultant Jurisdiction is acting as the summation of the individual Jurisdictions. However, anyone who dissents from the group is never under the groups Jurisdiction by their free will.

So what is an individuals Jurisdiction? That's a somewhat complicated question (outside of this response), but included in that Jurisdiction is choice. No other entity can choose for you. Not ever. All they can do is attempt to limit their choices to the point that an individual feels that they have no other choice. The truth is, there is always choice until you are dead (and possibly after, who knows).

The concept of a government as being "Sovereign" is itself fraudulent, at least by the way we use it. We think of a "government" as being an entity of its own. But that is a fiction (specifically, a "legal fiction" AKA it only exists within the framework of "law," which is itself a fictional framework expecting only the Natural Laws themselves). In other words, a government is not an entity by Natural Law, it only "exists" within the definition of a specific fictional system of laws, AKA a corporation ("an entity made corporeal through fiction").

A government itself is purely fictional. It can't interreact with the universe. It can't do anything. It doesn't actually exist. People can do things, make choices, interact with the universe, because they are real entities. A bunch of people calling itself a "government" is just a bunch of individuals, acting in concert (sometimes). As we do it, that group pretends that it is a single entity. That pretense causes all sorts of fuckery.

So when a bunch of people try to subvert the will of another, it's just a bunch of people doing that. They may try to do that, calling themselves a single entity through the fiction of law, but if you believe it, you are allowing yourself to believe their fraud. If they build a system (such as a government AKA fictional legal framework) that uses propaganda to falsely create those beliefs, subverting Natural Law, then all that has happened is that specific group of individuals (pretty much all of whom are Aristocrats) has done, is commit systemic fraud.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

As just one piece of evidence of that systemic fraud:

The person who (ostensibly) wrote that line in the DOI (Jefferson), spent his entire life enriching himself (a megamillionaire) on the backs of an entire village's worth of black Slaves and white Indentured Servants, most of whom (statistically) never worked out their indenture.

That same person insisted that the only people who should be allowed to vote (participate in the laws of the land and make their social choices) must be land owners (exactly the same as the Landed Aristocrats of England). Those land owners were themselves the children of the Aristocracy (mostly the "seventh sons" of the English and Dutch Aristocracies), consisting of less than 3% of the population. Women weren't considered "equal" about ANYTHING AT ALL. In many ways, they were worth even less than black slaves as far as that "free" government and laws were considered.

There are so many other issues in the government, the DOI, and the Constitution. SO MANY MORE. We ignore the issues if we are aware of them at all. If we are aware of them, they are shoved under the rug and told, through the propaganda systems, "they were a product of the times." The more you dig, the more you find who really created those systems, why they created them, and how they were setting up the system we call (or at least that I call) The Matrix.

10th amendment. These are not the only rights the state and the people reserve to themselves.