Home Distilling in US now legal at the Federal level?

[passedpawn]

I'm no lawyer, but it seems that the ruling here asserts that the 1868 ban on home distilling violated the constitution. If that's supported by federal courts, I don't see how individual states can continue to make it illegal.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/gover...nconstitutional-texas-judge-rules-2024-07-11/

 

[mac_1103]

I believe this judge is widely considered to be a loon, so I guess we'll see what happens.

 

[forestbeekeeper]

This should be fun.

 

[day_trippr]

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/threads/legal-distilling-in-the-usa.727179/#post-10387393

 

[madscientist451]

I believe this judge is widely considered to be a loon, so I guess we'll see what happens.

Based on your comments, I briefly looked into Judge Pittman’s background. I didn’t see anything looney, but perhaps you have more information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_T._Pittman
The OP’s comment about how individual states can continue to ban home distilling sidesteps the complexity of the issue. The 21st amendment repealed prohibition, but provides that individual states can set their own regulations about alcoholic beverages.
There is a chance the Texas case could get to the Supreme Court and Federal over reach could be curtailed, but it’s unlikely that individual state laws would be affected.

 

[mac_1103]

I briefly looked into Judge Pittman’s background. I didn’t see anything looney, but perhaps you have more information.

Continuing this side topic seems likely to lead to posts that would be inappropriate outside of the debate forum.

 

[redrocker652002]

Cool. I am not much of a hard alcohol drinker but do like to pour a small glass once in a while and enjoy a nice night in the spa. I have always wondered how much of a PITA it would be to get into that as well. Might look into it, but nobody here but me drinks so it would be very small batches

 

[mac_1103]

If this holds up I'm going to buy myself a new five gallon oak barrel, make myself some bourbon, age it for six years, and then brew a 13% RIS and age that for two years. I'm into delayed gratification.

 

[MaxStout]

There is a chance the Texas case could get to the Supreme Court and Federal over reach could be curtailed, but it’s unlikely that individual state laws would be affected.

That could very well be the judge's whole strategy: spark another states-rights battle. This could grow legs, as there's a good chance the 5th Circuit would be receptive to upholding the District Court decision on those grounds. Then on to SCOTUS.

The feds will fight it tooth and nail (protecting their tax revenue), but I could see the Supreme Ct. siding with the District Court's decision.

We could end up with a patchwork of varying state and local laws, and some may keep a total ban. But for jurisdictions that greenlight home distilling, this could be big.

 

[Barzahl]

Also no lawyer but if I understand rightly it isn't strictly legal for 14 days, the time at which the "stay" ends, and even then only if they don't get a further stay from a higher court

From the OP's link,
"He issued a permanent injunction barring the ban from being enforced against the Hobby Distillers Association's members but stayed his decision for 14 days so the government could seek a stay at the appellate court level."

My state (NJ) allows it but appears wants 938$ for a craft distillers license which is a little steep for me, although based on the text especially the 20,000 gallon per year limit I'm not sure a home distiller would need one, if the federal ban is removed I'll email the state and ask so i have it in writing; they also require stills to be registered.

According to 33:1-10.3d :
In 2013 the state legalized the distilling of craft alcohol and issued the first plenary distilling license. The fee for a Craft License is $938; distillers are limited to 20,000 gallons per year and must use at least 51% local raw materials in the distillation process. Only 3 samples (of one half ounce per sample) per person per calendar day may be offered for sampling purposes only. Only 5 liters may be sold for off-premises consumption.

 

[mashdar]

Under current precedent, growing a plant in your yard for private consumption is interstate commerce, and that's for a plant there isn't even a (legal) interstate market for...

Unless the supreme court rolls back that interpretation, and assuming judges are following the rules on applying precedent, this will be reversed on appeal, and other courts are going to uphold the ban.

No comment on what I think of all this. The above are just giving the lay of the land.

 

[doug293cz]

Moderator's note: Please do not discuss what might happen to this district court ruling in any particular appeals court. That is veering into politics, which is not allowed outside of the "Debate" forum. Any such future postings here will be deleted. You may post about any actual rulings that do get handed down, as long as you avoid discussion of the politics of the particular court(s) involved.

If you feel this is a sub-topic that is ripe for discussion, then start a thread in the "Debate" forum, rather than bringing it up here.

doug293cz
HBT Moderator

 

[whoaru99]

My state (NJ) allows it but appears wants 938$ for a craft distillers license which is a little steep for me,

Is that yearly or some period longer?

If yearly then, yeah, that's a fair chunk for a backyard distiller. But, if it's a one-time fee it's probably worth considering. It would be offset over time provided one could craft a good spirit. I like bourbon. Good bourbon ain't cheap these days.

 

[MaxStout]

There were identical bills introduced in both the MN Senate and House earlier this year that would have amended the existing home brewing statute to allow distilling, as well. Unfortunately, neither of these bills passed in the session this year. Interestingly, the proposed amending language basically inserted the term "distillation" to accompany the existing beer and wine language, which would have allowed lawful home production of the same 100 gallons per year as is already allowed for beer/wine.

Maybe next year?

 

[mac_1103]

Interestingly, the proposed amending language basically inserted the term "distillation" to accompany the existing beer and wine language, which would have allowed lawful home production of the same 100 gallons per year as is already allowed for beer/wine.

This has come up in other threads in the past. 100 gallons of 100 proof per person per year might be seen as pushing the envelope on "personal consumption" just a wee bit.

 

[Kickass]

This takes all the fun out of setting up your still in the middle of the night, drinking like crazy and pretending you’re doing something covertly wrong and illegal. I prefer to make my shine with disregard and abandon for the law.

 

[bernardsmith]

There have been at least two posts on Youtube from Clawhammer, a manufacturer of home distillation equipment about this legal ruling, and while the first post suggested that the legal opinion might begin to open the door to make home distilling legal, a second more nuanced video suggested that the opinion was more with regard to the work of a specific organization that worked to make distilling legal and that without legal knowledge and qualification , Clawhammer, was back walking their earlier assumptions that the opinion was broad and not very narrow as it now appeared to be.