WASHINGTON — In a boost to those who want to make whiskey in their bathtub or gin in their kitchen, the Supreme Court announced Monday that it will consider whether to strike down a longstanding federal ban on distilling spirits at home.
Although interest in craft hooch distilling has continued despite the 150-year-old ban, advocates hope the court will remove the threat of criminal penalties, which can include a fine of up to $10,000 and a maximum sentence of five years in prison.
For decades, people have been able to produce wine and beer at home for their personal use, without penalty.
The distilling ban was enacted in 1868 in an effort to combat tax evasion by spirits manufacturers. It prohibits the distillation of spirits in “any dwelling house” or surrounding structures.
Challengers include the Hobby Distillers Association and several of its members. One of them, Scott McNutt, has a still at home that he uses to distill combustible alcohol. Another, Rick Morris, owns a company that makes stills that can be used at home.
They filed a lawsuit in Texas after being informed by the federal Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, part of the Treasury Department, that they could not obtain a license to distill at home due to federal prohibition.
The lawsuit contains several allegations, including that Congress exceeded its taxing authority by passing a ban that actually generated no revenue.
In another challenge filed in Ohio, another would-be home distiller, John Ream, raised similar claims.
The two cases resulted in conflicting decisions from federal appeals courts. In the Texas case, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the challengers, while in the Ohio case, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reached the opposite conclusion.
As a result, both losing parties appealed and all parties agreed that the Supreme Court should issue a final decision that would apply nationally.
If the challengers win, they will still have to register their stills and pay excise duties on the spirits they produce, even if these are intended for their own consumption.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer, representing the federal government, defended the law in court, saying it is within Congress’s power to restrict taxable activities by location if there is a good chance the taxes will not be paid.
Similar to marijuana, which remains largely illegal under federal law while various states have legalized it, several states allow home distilling, including West Virginia, which legalized it in 2024. These laws do not take precedence over federal prohibition.
Legislation has also been introduced in Congress to repeal federal restrictions.
Gn headline
