The Ninth Amendment stands in direct conflict with the underlying philosophy of the strict constructionist. When the Bill of Rights was drafted, the primary complaint that the States had was their fear that the enumerated rights would be regarded as an exhaustive list of rights of the people. As a result, the Ninth Amendment was drafted and included in the Bill of Rights. It is undeniable that there was a recognition of unenumerated rights.

Many strict constructionists argue that because the Constitution does not specifically refer to something, say privacy, as a right, then the courts would be, in fact, legislating. Here's the problem: The Bill of Rights was created specifically to deny Congress, the government, the ability to pass laws to refuse the people enumerated rights (I-VIII) and unenumreated rights (IX). The strict constructionists essentially say that if privacy is a right, let Congress, elected by the people, pass a law to make it so. But if we let the unenumerated rights be determined and defined by Congress or the state legislatures (instead of the courts), we would be placing it in the very hands of the body, agaist which the Bill of Rights is seeking.

This is why many strict constructionists ignore the IX Amendment or even dismiss it as ambiguously meaningless.