The Tenth Amendment Center, a constitutional/libertarian think tank, spells out the how and why of eliminating expansion of the NSA and other federal enforcers by states passing legislation making it unlawful for a state to assist the feds. The article points to NSA data centers that requires massive amounts of water for cooling. This water happens to be provided by the individual states housing these data centers and if this legislation were to pass it would be unlawful for the state to continue to provide water to NSA data centers.
You're ignoring the federal trumps doctrine that the federal government uses to control state governments.
Ideally, there would be no governments in existence at all, as governments actions are inherently forceful and violent, as those in the government impose their will on you through the most powerful hierarchy the world have ever seen. These are not good times to live in this world, and in the US.
As we live in a non ideal work, and governments exist all over the world, at all levels, a pragmatic approach has to be taken. The idea is to both minimize the government's exploitation of you, and maximize your exploitation of the government, (as the government is fundamentally exploitative), and if you can use a level of government to reduce restrictions on your rights and freedoms from another level of government, it should be done, no matter what, purely utilitarian. For instance, gay marriage isn't legally recognized in lots of states, and there is much bigotry in the laws, so the federal government should force all states to legally recognize gay marriage. Similarly, with marijuana, state governments should increase in legalizing and be able to nullify federal drug prohibitions.
Anything you can do to maximize your freedom, and minimize exploitation of you, you have to do it.
Honestly, Printz/Mack v. United States is terrible evidence against states helping the NSA. In fact, I don't think making the states attempt to fight the federal government is the path to victory at all.
GoSuBrasky is right, look at the history of the U.S.. State's rights/power over the fed have never solved problems.
States haven't had power since the Articles of Confederation.
I know that, but there have still been plenty of debates about it. Take the Nullification Crisis for example.
It's funny all of our examples are so old lol. Anyways, we agree this argument is bogus and I'm glad it is. It would be terrible to have to deal with crossing state boundaries if there wasn't a more powerful federal government.