Is the Anti-Lynching Bill really a federal power grab?

>>5323413 lb

Another angle on the so-called "Anti-Lynching" bill which is not about lynching per se (>>5307064 pb) is that it's another example of federal overreach, an attempt to subvert the Constitution.

There are only three crimes mentioned in the Constitution: treason, piracy and counterfeiting. The founders meant for the States to handle everything else as is made explicit in the tenth amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Over time, more and more federal laws have been enacted that take power away from the States. When challenged, the courts have used the Necessary and Proper Clause and the Commerce Clause to justify upholding these laws, wrongly, a strict constitutionalist would say.

For example, some federal hate crimes, which would now become lynching crimes if a conspiracy is involved, are only federal crimes in certain restricted circumstances, such as crossing a State line or a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce is used which I believe even includes using the Internet. This is how the Commerce Clause is used to justify federal overreach.

So what may really going on is another federal power grab under cover of anti-racism and abetted by a lynching hoax.