andysim
Well-Known Member
Just do it.
Its easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.
Its easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.
I would find a different career, sir.Actually, no it isn't taught on day one, but I'm glad you have elevated yourself to the status of a law professor.
Your concept of law is incorrectly oversimplistic. Taking your example above, chewing bubble gum may not be expressly illegal, but there may be laws that broadly criminalize or otherwise disallow conduct that can be interpreted by authorities with the power to interpret the law to include chewing bubble gum. There can also be situations where legal conduct can be done in a time, place or manner that can push it into the bounds of illegal conduct in some form.
Additionally, the law does not operate in the vast majority of areas by making enumerated lists of illegal activities that leaves everything else legal. Again, legislative acts and administrative decisions/rules/regulations tend to be broadly written to include more than a finite list of activities. At times the law is written in a way that legalizing specific conduct that by exclusion bans all others. The above cited Texas code is a perfect example. It gives a finite inclusions of acts that are illegal and by nature of mutual exclusivity, those actions that are not included are excluded and therefore banned.
Wait... what's this trash about brewing only 200 gallons in a year? Whoops!
I would find a different career, sir.
Speaking of the 100 gallon limit - yes 100, not 200 - well sort of.
Let me just preface this post by saying that I'm not a lawyer, altough I do have law school training (took the notary track).
If you look at the federal provisions, you see that the brewing of beer is permitted for personal or family use if it not in contradiction to state or local law.
If you look at the dispositions on removal of beer you see:
§ 25.206 Removal of beer.
Beer made under §25.205 may be removed from the premises where made for personal or family use including use at organized affairs, exhibitions or competitions such as homemaker's contests, tastings or judging. Beer removed under this section may not be sold or offered for sale.
This seems to indicate to me that personal and family use should be interpreted in a inclusive fashion, since the removal of beer to be served at organized affairs (such as a wedding) is permitted under federal law. Unless you apply some ridiculous logic, it'S pretty much guaranteed that beer removed from the household to be drank at an organized affair is not going to be only for the guy who produced it and his family.
Now, the state statute you have quoted do not in any shape or form apply to a wedding, unless you practice some wishful thinking or voluntary blindness. A wedding is not a competition, no matter how many scoresheets you scatter around. I'd say that unless you can spot something in state or local law that prohibits serving beer at a wedding, you're fine.
This doesn't mean that such a law like this doesn't exist or that trouble could not arise from you serving your homebrew. If the venue has no permit to serve alcohol on the premises or some company has exclusivity rights to serve their product at the venue, there might be an issue. I know that up here, if you plan on having more than X people in attendance and you plan on people drinking (yes, even free stuff), you need a permit to do so.
I believe the OP quotes some Texas language that the TABC must approve any public event with homebrew in writing. That is going to be the controlling restriction on the federal statute.
Rules of statutory construction would require you to interpret "organized affairs" in the context of the other items listed -- especially the examples -- all of which are clearly related to some sort of tasting or competition. It's highly unlikely that a wedding applies to either the federal or state language. That is going to place a wedding outside the boundaries of both federal and state use of homebrew, therefore it would not be permitted under law.
Liquor laws create inclusive areas of legal brewing, distribution and transportation. Manufacturing alcoholic beverages is illegal in all cases, except for those areas where both the federal and state government have expressly made it legal.
Again -- I am not suggesting whether or not the OP should bring beer to his wedding or whether it is likely the wedding would be the target of an investigation. The OP's question was whether it was legal and that's all I am speaking towards.
Not to tard this thread up more (I'm a civilist, so I know jack sh&T about how common lawyers approach written law), but you seem to be basing your conclusions almost solely on what that excerpt of state law that was given in the OP and the examples given in the fed law. I agree that a wedding is not a tasting, but what do you suggest "organized affairs" mean, since all the examples given in the definition fall into the label of "competition". The use of "such" to me indicates that the legislator didn't want to create a finite list.
But as I said, very different law backgrounds and tradition. We tend to have laws written in the broadest terms possible in order to allow them to bend and be interpreted more readily. Statutes in a common law system read very differently, plus I'm a French guy.
Texas statute Title 4, Chapter 109, Subchapter B, §109.21 provides that a license or permit is not required for the manufacture of not more than 200 gallons of wine, malt liquor, or beer.
Source: http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/pages/government-affairs/statutes/texas
Sounds like 200 in Texas to me.
^^^ People bragging about it on an internet forum![]()