Interesting 10'th amendment case

The Supreme Court is always interesting.  Recently they agreed to hear a 10th amendment case.  For those not familiar with the 10th amendment it reserves to the states all powers not specifically enumerated as federal.  Mind you, it's not often applied as witnessed by a long history of federalization of crime.  But that may be about to change.

The case, Bond v. U.S. (09-1227), has an interesting fact pattern.  Briefly Mrs Bond, a chemist and  native of Barbados, became enraged when she learned that her best friend was pregnant by her husband.  Seeking revenge she used chemicals to attempt to harm her friend.  The friend noticed the chemicals and involved the police.  After the police failed to be involved, the friend reported the matter to the postal service.  Subsequently, the postal service photographed Mrs Bond putting chemicals on the friend's mail box.  Mrs Bond was charged with mail fraud and use of terrorist (chemical) weapons in Federal court.  Her attorneys offered a guilty plea in State court arguing that this was a domestic crime and thus a State matter.  Federal prosecutors declined the offer and Mrs Bond subsequently pleaded guilty in Federal court and appealed on the grounds that this was a State not Federal crime.  The appeal was denied on the grounds that Mrs Bond had no standing in a State v. Federal matter.  The Supreme court chose to hear the case not to simply force the case into State court.  Interestingly the Justice Department initially supported the standing argument but has subsequently reversed itself and will support Mrs Bond's position so the Federal Government's case will be argued by outside counsel not the Justice Department.

Common Sense notes the following:

• Clearly Mrs Bond was overcharged.  The facts argue a domestic matter not a terrorist act.  That said, Mrs Bond is clearly by her own admission, guilty of violation of Federal postal laws.
• To argue that a citizen does not have standing when a constitutional issue is in play is clearly not constitutional.  The Constitution is not simply an agreement between State and Federal Government, it is an agreement between citizens and the Federal government.

Common Sense wonders why the Justice department ever chose to prosecute in Federal court?  

The 10th amendment was a key matter when the Constitution was ratified.  It provides a fundamental bulwark limiting Federal powers.  While it has, over the years, been largely ignored as Federalism has crept ever more into everyday life, it remains an important principal.  Common Sense thinks this case provides an opportunity to reinforce the notion that the Federal government has limited power and rights.