A timely subject, I just completed a biography of Richard Henry Lee (the first to officially call for Independence in the 2nd Continental Congress), and his arguments for Virginia to not ratify the Constitution and his likely authorship of the "the federal farmer" pamphlets that became part of the "Anti-Federalist Papers" marked Lee along with Patrick Henry and George Clinton as prominent anti-federalists, but their arguments seem to have merit now that hindsight can be applied - the central government had too much power and the Executive with the Senate would become the American Aristocracy dominating over millions of people not just state sovereignty, the lifetime appointment to courts without juries (the appellate courts including the Supreme Court) would be injurious to Liberty and the lack of a Bill of Rights just added more fuel to the prospects of individual Liberty. Lee argued for Compact Federalism on a model similar to the Swiss Federation of the time. When Madison shocked the Federalists in the new Congress and joined anti-federalist calls for a Bill of Rights he wisely saw it as beneficial to add them, saw that it eased relations between factions and proved the amendment process can work.
Since then, the Courts have solidified Federalism as we know it, which is not of the Compact variety.
Fletcher v. Peck (1810) was the first time SCOTUS shot down a state law. The Marshall Court used the contract clause to shoot down a state law and reaffirmed individual property rights, which seemed to indicate it sided properly.
In Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816) the Marshall Court (as written by Joseph Story since Marshall recused himself) asserted Federal Court supremacy (see clause) over state courts for the first time.
In McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) the Marshall Court set another big precedent by citing the Necessary and Proper clause to strike down the tax scheme the state of Maryland came up with against the Bank of the US, Marshall said the bank was created by Congress properly, that individuals in states had sovereignty not the states, he broadened the interpretation of the Necessary and Proper clause and used it to strike down the state action as the federal Congress has authority to act on its enumerated powers so long as it does not violate any limit in the Constitution.
This last one is a mixed bag, but the broader interpretation of the N&P clause and lack of express limitations in the Constitution (which the Founders never thought would be necessary for a nation populated with educated people with arms and a unwavering jealous love of Liberty) made it easier for more malicious and mendacious characters in coming years to exploit. So we went from affirming federal power and personal liberty to an erosion of the later to be benefit of the former...because of codified precedents built brick by brick.
Some battles never go away, they just rise and fall...a final reckoning will come...one day.
But...Bill Nye the Stupid Guy and his silly scheme have no chance. That idiot is barking at the moon!