LEAVE CRIMINAL LAWS TO STATES

United States Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist has a point. We
shouldn't be making a federal crime out of everything.

"Federal courts were not created to adjudicate local crimes, no matter how
sensational or heinous the crimes may be," Rehnquist wrote in his
end-of-the-year report to Congress. "State courts do, can and should handle
such problems."

It is ironic that the chief justice should be criticizing the
devolution-preaching Congress -- more power to the states, less power to
the feds -- for behaving as if it has gotten its mantra backwards. The
justification is the need to get tough on crime.

What started out 20 years ago as a federal war on drugs has turned to a war
on carjackers and child support deadbeats and juvenile offenders. There
are so many new federal criminal laws and mandatory sentences that cases
were up 15 percent last year in federal courts. Federal prison population
also has increased, sometimes with the tacit approval of state authorities
who are grateful to pass the buck and the bills elsewhere.

Many of the new crimes -- carjacking in particular -- shouldn't be
considered federal offenses. They weren't for our first 200 years, and
don't need to be now. States always have had the primary responsibility for
prosecuting crimes and, for the most part, have done an adequate job. We've
never heard a compelling reason for the criminal pendulum swinging so
dramatically to the federal courts.

Of course, there are exceptions. Crimes that cross state lines, organized
crime and terrorist attacks against the nation should fall to the federal
government to prosecute. With criminal activity, like most other
businesses, getting more sophisticated and broader in scope, there may be
some larger role for federal courts to play. But there must be limits.
Without them, where do federal responsibilities end and the states' job
begin?

Rehnquist suggested congressional hearings to set standards for when crimes
should be federalized, with the intention of curtailing the growing federal
jurisdiction. The proposal should be welcome, particularly to those who
believe in making the national government smaller and expecting more of the
states.