That is the title of my very brief “Hypothetical Reply to Professor Orin Kerr“, which I have also cut-and-pasted below:

“Some years ago my colleague Orin S. Kerr concluded in these pages that ‘it appears very likely that [Immanuel] Kant had no influence on evidentiary approaches in 18th-century Bulgaria,’ 18 Green Bag 2d 251, 253 (2015). This judgment has troubled me for years. Although I do not call into question Kerr’s meticulous historical research, I would propose the following Kantian thought experiment: What if Immanuel Kant had been an 18th- century Bulgarian law professor?

“Some readers might object that my Kantian thought experiment is capricious or contrived. Be that as it may, thought experiments, especially improbable or outrageous ones, can be useful devices for detecting hidden anomalies and producing new or surprising insights. In any case, the leap of imagination required to conjure up an 18th-century Bulgarian Kant is no more implausible than a cat that is simultaneously dead and alive or a mischievous demon who manipulates microscopic molecules or an imaginary ‘utility monster’ who gains an ungodly amount of pleasure from doing evil deeds.

“My point being, if Kant had been an 18th-century Bulgarian law professor, it is very likely indeed that he would have made lasting contributions to the theory of evidence. Perhaps he would have developed a novel moral approach to the law of evidence or shed light on the relation between truth and hearsay. One can only begin to imagine the infinite possibilities and intriguing new ideas our Kantian thought experiment might engender.”