text: the majority first example,ante,at,is the assimilative crimes act,a,a statute that incorporates state criminal law into federal enclaves if the act or omission is not made punishable by any enactment of congress but would be punishable if committed or omitted within the jurisdiction of the state.the court held that,in identifying such a gap,courts should ignore jurisdictional,or other technical,differences between a state and federal statute.lewis united states.but the way courts match the elements of a state law to a federal analog under the assimilative crimes act differs fundamentally from our ina inquiry.the basic question under the assimilative crimes act is whether federal statutes reveal an intent to occupy so much of the field as would exclude the use of the particular state statute at issue.at.under the assimilative crimes act,the state statute is not compared to a single federal statute,but rather to a complex of federal statutes that roughly cover the same general conduct and policies.ibid.that statute thus has little to teach us about a in interpreting the assimilative crimes act,every member of the court rejected the simple approach that the court generally employs to construe the aggravated felony provisions of the ina.see,at kennedy,dissenting allowing slight differences in definition between federal and state statute and using inquiry only as a starting point 