Erik Owens Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 Source: https://www.law360.com/ July 12, 2024 The federal laws banning making liquor at home are unconstitutional, a Texas federal judge said Wednesday, granting a permanent injunction to a home distilling group and saying the ban goes beyond Congress' enumerated powers. "Congress did nothing more than statutorily ferment a crime — without any reference to taxation, exaction, protection of revenue, or sums owed to the government," U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman wrote in his opinion. The Hobby Distillers Association sued the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau late last year, saying that the prohibition of home distilling was unconstitutional and asking the court to enjoin the government from enforcing the laws involved. The government objected, saying that the laws are constitutional and that Congress placed statutory limitation on spirit distilling a century and a half ago. But Judge Pittman agreed with the association, finding that the law goes beyond Congress' power. "The Constitution is written to prevent societal amnesia of the defined limits it places on this government of and by the people," Judge Pittman wrote. "That is where the judiciary must declare when its coequal branches overstep their constitutional authority. Congress has done so here." The judge enjoined the government from enforcing the laws on one individual plaintiff and the distillers group. He dismissed three individual plaintiffs for lack of standing. Judge Pittman stayed enforcement of the order for two weeks to give the government time to appeal. The government's argument that it could ban homemade distilling to protect its tax revenue from other liquor didn't convince the court. Every tax has to create some revenue for the government, the judge wrote, but the laws banning homemade liquor don't actually raise any revenue. "But that is not the government's last call, because Congress may still take necessary and proper actions to effectuate otherwise valid power," Judge Pittman wrote. The dispositive question is whether the laws are necessary and proper to collect taxes on distilled spirits, he said. The distillers group also argued that the necessary and proper clause, which gives Congress the power "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper" to carry out its express powers, constrains the federal government's powers, and that the U.S. Supreme Court has been consistent on the issue for centuries. The government can't use its taxing power to ban at-home distilling because that power falls under state sovereignty, the group said. The government argued that no court has recognized a liberty interest in making booze at home, but the judge said its cited cases missed the mark. The laws aren't necessary or proper to collect taxes on liquor, he wrote. The government also argued that making hooch at home affects interstate commerce, and therefore the government could regulate it under the commerce clause. But Judge Pittman said homemade booze doesn't affect interstate commerce in a tangible way. "Beginning and ending with the text, neither of these provisions connect the prohibited behavior to interstate commerce," Judge Pittman wrote. "And no reasonable construction of the statutes can insert language that does." Dan Greenberg of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, counsel for the Hobby Distillers Association, told Law360 on Thursday that the court seemed to have paid close attention to the structural nature of the text of the Constitution and case law on taxing power and interstate commerce. The government had sent a letter to one of the plaintiffs threatening him with prosecution for at-home distilling, and that was enough to show standing for that plaintiff, said Devin Watkins of the CEI, another lawyer for the distillers group. A representative for the government didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The Hobby Distillers Association and the individual plaintiffs are represented by Devin Watkins and Dan Greenberg of the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Casey Griffith and Michael Barbee of Griffith Barbee PLLC. The government is represented by Elizabeth Tulis, Hannah Solomon-Strauss and Anna Deffebach of the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Division. The case is Hobby Distillers Association et al. v. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau et al., case number 4:23-cv-01221, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angrycricket Posted July 13 Share Posted July 13 THats awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernhighlander Posted July 13 Share Posted July 13 Outstanding! It's about time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Condie Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 14 days have passed. Now what? Is it legal now to distill liquor in your home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiskeytango Posted July 27 Share Posted July 27 Not to be a downer but distilling is far different and much more dangerous than Brewing or wine making. Hope people stay safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bier Distillery Posted July 27 Share Posted July 27 True, but far less dangerous than driving a car. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernhighlander Posted July 27 Share Posted July 27 Home distilling is legal under state law in the following states: Alaska, Arizona, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, and Rhode Island. If you live in one of these states, please make sure that you understand the laws in your state concerning home distilling before you get started. Of course before the aforementioned judge's court ruling, home distilling was illegal under federal law, however since the court ruling, I'm not sure if it is legal now or not. I live in Missouri which was the 1st state to legalize home distilling back in 09. After it was legalized here I called the federal ATF for further info and they directed me to the state ATF here in MO. The MO ATF said that they enforced state law so as long as I followed the state laws they said I would be fine, so to be on the safe side I called the Sheriff in my county to let him what I would be doing and he said that it was fine with him and a little later he started home distilling and he purchased some of my home distilling equipment. If anyone needs home distilling equipment check out my website http://distillery-equipment.com and click on catalog at the upper left side of the page. We also sell equipment to distilleries. Our stills range from 5 gallons to 2,500 gallon. Our home distilling stills range in size from 5 gallons to 26 gallons. We follow all state and federal laws concerning the sale of distillery equipment. Happy distilling! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolverk Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 Can't speak for the others, but Arizonas legalization is a joke. In order to legally home distill in AZ you have to register federally, but you cant register because it was illegal to distill at home (new rulings may help). More than anything it basically made it so locally they wouldn't come down on you unless you got caught selling. I'm hoping this new effort really does eventually turn into something resembling how things work with beer/wine... but I guess time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southernhighlander Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 I remember when it was illegal to make beer and wine at home, then Jimmy Carter signed the legislation that legalized it in 1978. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted July 29 Share Posted July 29 Awesome. Now all we need is to get rid of this BS three tier system. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Owens Posted August 16 Author Share Posted August 16 The Department of Justice just put an injunction on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolverk Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 Yup. I'm hoping we see an appeal to the Supreme Court soon. gov.uscourts.txnd.384014.51.0.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now