I previously blogged about what would be a federal crime in 1787. I conclude that for the most part, there could not be any.
Corey C, a bright eyed, blue haired 1L at George Mason law, posed a fantastic question.
If there were no federal crimes, why would the Constitution have needed the 4th, 5th, and 6th criminal procedure amendments?
If the only crimes were state crimes, and there were no federal crimes, how would the federal government have been bound by these amendments?
Corey suggests that this perhaps counsels in favor of incorporation. Perhaps, Barron v. Baltimore was wrong?
Just some more food for thought, but it gets my originalist juices flowing.