Overview: John Ream, an Ohio engineer, is challenging a federal law enacted in 1868 that prohibits distilling spirits at home. The case has reached the Supreme Court, which may review the constitutionality of the ban amidst conflicting rulings from appeals courts in Ohio and Louisiana.
The Full Story
John Ream currently home-brews vanilla stout, wine, and mead for personal use, but he expresses a desire to experiment with rye mash for distilling into whiskey. He states, “I really want to dive in and play with some rye mash for distilling into whiskey,” noting the satisfaction of making something for oneself. However, the 1868 federal ban keeps him from experimenting with spirits. Penalties for violation include a $10,000 fine per batch and up to five years imprisonment.
The legal landscape is divided between two appeals courts regarding the uniform enforcement of the law. The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ban under the Constitution clause allowing Congress to pass laws that are “necessary and proper” to carry out assigned duties. Conversely, an appeals court in Louisiana considered a similar lawsuit and said the ban is unconstitutional. As a result, the law cannot be uniformly enforced across the country unless the Supreme Court intervenes.
The Hobby Distillers Association, founded by Rick Morris in 2013, is among the groups trying to end the ban. Andrew Grossman, a senior legal fellow at The Buckeye Institute representing the challengers, argues that getting rid of the ban could protect individual liberty. Alison LaCroix, a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago Law School, noted that the lawsuits could end up stretching far beyond home distilling to affect many activities that Congress has been able to regulate for decades.
Production & Profile
While Ream focuses on spirits like whiskey, wine, and mead, the historical context of production includes George Washington’s distillery at Mount Vernon. The 2,250-square-foot whiskey distillery at Mount Vernon was one of the largest in early America. This facility operated during a time when prominent founding fathers had successful distilleries on their homesteads.
The modern landscape contrasts with historical production methods where tax evasion was a primary concern. Before the ban, at least seven-eighths of all spirits made in the country were not being taxed according to the government. Today, the tax generates billions of dollars in annual revenue. Congress repealed federal restrictions and taxes on brewing beer for personal use in 1978, which led to a boom in small breweries after home brewers showed the appeal of hoppy IPAs and malty stouts.
Brand & Industry History
The history leading to the ban involves significant historical events including the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794. To help pay for the Revolutionary War, Congress taxed distilled spirits – the first nationwide internal revenue tax – beginning a long fight over the unpopular measure. In defending the ban against the latest challenge, the Justice Department points out that the tax was regularly evaded. That eventually led to laws in 1866 and 1868 prohibiting home stills, which were difficult for government inspectors to find.
Before the ban, at least seven-eighths of all spirits made in the country were not being taxed according to the government. A bottle of straight rye whiskey made from a recipe by George Washington was auctioned at Christie’s Auction House in New York on Dec. 6, 2007. The conservative groups trying to end the ban say getting rid of it could spark innovation and revitalization for hard liquor that legalization of homebrewing in the 1970s did for beer.
What This Means
The Supreme Court will consider whether to take up the issue after it starts its next term in October. The government and The Buckeye Institute want the Supreme Court to take up the issue, but they disagree on the scope of what the justices should consider. The Buckeye Institute wants the justices to also revisit a 2005 decision that affirmed a broad interpretation of Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.
Alison LaCroix said there are probably justices on the current 6-3 conservative court who want to overturn that decision. For many conservatives, there is a sense that limiting the powers of the federal government – especially of Congress – are central to what they think the Constitution requires. However, the tricky bit is doing so without eviscerating Congress’ regulatory powers across a lot of different dimensions, including criminal law, that the justices may also think important.
Consumer Takeaway
Hobbyists like Rick Morris are waiting for the outcome as they seek to distill their own spirits. The court will consider whether to take up the issue after it starts its next term in October. Until then, home distillers can be fined $10,000 for every batch and imprisoned for up to five years.
Source: Read the original article
