Supreme Court to Review Home Distilling Ban; DISCUS Urges Caution, Plaintiff 'Thrilled' Case to Be Heard

The Supreme Court agreed to review whether Congress had the authority to prohibit distilling spirits in private homes.

In a statement, the Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S. noted the dangers of spirits production, even on a professional basis, and urged lawmakers to "think carefully before legalizing these activities."

Risks Noted

DISCUS Chief Legal Officer Courtney Armour noted the council "appreciates the enthusiasm of spirits fans and their desire to have a more hands-on experience with the products, but cautions that producing spirits comes with many risks that must be carefully navigated.

"The distillation process can be quite dangerous, including risk of explosion, burns, fires, and more.  The spirits industry has a clear focus on safety and process management to mitigate these risks, but even in that careful environment there are still accidents, injuries and even fatalities. 

"Furthermore, if not produced properly, the finished product can cause blindness or death.  In a home distilling setting, these dangers would not just be limited to the individuals engaging in the production but also their neighbors in the surrounding area, she explained, adding:

"In light of these very serious risks, we implore officials to think carefully before legalizing these activities and if they choose to do so there should also be very stringent regulations to protect the community.”

Absurdity of a Federal Crime

The Buckeye Institute, represented the plaintiff, said in a statement, "The U.S. Supreme Court now has a tremendous opportunity to consider the scope and reach of congressional power to regulate activities under the taxing power and the necessary and proper clause.

“Our country’s founders would be rolling over in their graves to learn that a pastime in which even George Washington partook, which is as American as apple pie and certainly a lot older, has quite absurdly been turned into a federal crime,” said Robert Alt, president and chief executive officer of The Buckeye Institute and a lead attorney on the case. “The Buckeye Institute is thrilled that the U.S. Supreme Court took the McNutt case and our clients will have their day in court.”

“This case is important not only for would-be home distillers, but for everyone concerned about the legitimate constitutional limits on the federal government’s authority,” said Andrew M. Grossman, senior legal fellow at The Buckeye Institute, partner in BakerHostetler’s Washington, D.C., office, and counsel of record on the case. “We hope all Americans join us in raising a glass of home-distilled spirits in celebration after the U.S. Supreme Court rules in this David v. Goliath battle for freedom.”

Issues

In their lawsuit, Plaintiffs claimed Congress overstepped its taxation authority when it enacted the 1868 statute. The intent was to curb fraud by commercial distillers.

The Government argues Congress acted properly to prevent producers from evading Federal excise taxes, and warned lifting the ban would violate precedent and erode congressional powers.