Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
- The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a 158-year-old home distilling ban unconstitutional on Friday.
- The ban, enacted in 1868, was intended to prevent liquor tax evasion.
- The ruling supports individual liberty and challenges the limits of federal power.
NEW ORLEANS — An appeals court on Friday declared unconstitutional a nearly 158-year-old federal ban on home distilling, calling it an unnecessary and improper means for Congress to exercise its power to tax.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled in favor of the nonprofit Hobby Distillers Association and four of its 1,300 members.
They argued that people should be free to distill spirits at home, whether as a hobby or for personal consumption including, in one instance, to create an apple-pie-vodka recipe.
The ban was part of a law passed during Reconstruction in July 1868, in part to thwart liquor tax evasion, and subjected violators to up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
Writing for a three-judge panel, Circuit Judge Edith Hollan Jones said the ban actually reduced tax revenue by preventing distilling in the first place, unlike laws that regulated the manufacture and labeling of distilled spirits on which the government could collect taxes.
She also said that under the government's logic, Congress could criminalize virtually any in-home activity that might escape notice from tax collectors, including remote work and home-based businesses.
"Without any limiting principle, the government's theory would violate this court's obligation to read the Constitution carefully to avoid creating a general federal authority akin to the police power," Jones wrote.
The Department of Justice had no immediate comment. Another defendant, the Treasury Department's Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Devin Watkins, a lawyer representing the Hobby Distillers Association, in an interview called the ruling an important decision about the limits of federal power.
Andrew Grossman, who argued the nonprofit's appeal, called the decision "an important victory for individual liberty" that lets the plaintiffs "pursue their passion to distill fine beverages in their homes."
"I look forward to sampling their output," he said.
The decision upheld a July 2024 ruling by U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, Texas. He put his ruling on hold so the government could appeal.
