And ignoring the context that they ratified the Constitution as the people of independent states; each by the act of its respective people, vs. its legislature as before.
No, the states were already independent, and it wouldn't identify the ratifying body.
Their people each simply ratified it, for their state only; thus establishing the people of each state as its final authority.
According to you they ratified it as one group; but that didn't happen.
Each state's people acted to ratify the Constitution for their state,, just as their legislature had done for the Articles of Confederation for their state.
That was the main difference between the two unions... and the sole difference as far as each state's independence or final authority went.
Nonetheless, what they agreed to was a Constitution that granted ultimate sovereignty to the People of The United States, granted Supremacy to the laws of the United States, and granted Judicial review to the Supreme court of the United states. Thus the term "abandoned" used explicitly by Texas above. And all without any provision to return any of these powers back to the states. And this is how the courts have ruled on multiple occasions.