美国最高法院将审查1868年联邦家庭蒸馏酒禁令
U.S. Supreme Court to review 1868 federal ban on home distilling of liquor

原始链接: https://www.staradvertiser.com/2026/10/19/breaking-news/u-s-supreme-court-to-review-1868-federal-ban-on-home-distilling-of-liquor/

美国最高法院将决定联邦禁止家庭蒸馏酒精的法律是否符合宪法。该法是在内战后为防止逃税而制定的。特朗普政府为该法辩护,而包括“业余蒸馏协会”在内的挑战者认为国会无权禁止家庭蒸馏。下级法院意见不一:第五巡回上诉法院推翻了该法,而第六巡回上诉法院维持了该法。十五个共和党领导的州支持挑战者。该法最高可判处五年监禁和1万美元罚款。大法官预计将在6月前听取辩论并作出裁决。政府表示,禁令保护税收收入;挑战者称家庭蒸馏是美国历史悠久的消遣。

Hacker News 讨论了最高法院对1868年联邦家庭蒸馏禁令的审查。链接的评论文章认为该案胜算大,因为下级法院出现分歧且一项联邦法规被推翻;挑战者称该禁令超出了国会的征税和州际商业权力,引用了 Wickard v. Filburn 案。评论者就家庭蒸馏是否应合法化展开辩论,指出其与发酵不同且更危险。一些人认为法院可以审查长期存在的法律;另一些人则认为该禁令保护的是税收而非安全。一位评论者说合法化可能像家酿啤酒推动啤酒业一样促进精酿烈酒,另一位则警告城市中的爆炸风险。还有人指出酒精消费正在下降。总体而言,该帖围绕联邦家庭蒸馏禁令是否违宪以及其废除对精酿蒸馏和安全可能意味着什么展开。
相关文章

原文

WASHINGTON >> The U.S. Supreme Court agreed today to decide the legality of a federal ban on the home distilling of alcoholic spirits that was enacted in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War to crack down on liquor tax evasion.

The dispute pits President Donald Trump’s administration, which is defending the law, against challengers who argue that the home-distilling prohibition exceeds the authority of Congress under the U.S. Constitution. More than a dozen Republican-led states have backed the legal challenge to the statute.

The Supreme Court took up the administration’s appeal of a lower court’s decision against the ban. The justices are expected to hear arguments in the case and issue a ruling by the end of June.

Following the Civil War of 1861-1865, Congress sought to protect federal revenue by passing a law that banned home distilling. The current version of the law subjects violators to up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Challenges to the ban’s legality have led to a split among lower federal courts of appeals.

In April, the New Orleans-based Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared the law unconstitutional, calling it an unnecessary and improper means for Congress to exercise its power to tax. Days later, the Cincinnati-based Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the constitutionality of the law, saying it was a “necessary and proper means” of collecting federal excise tax on distilled spirits.

The dueling decisions prompted appeals to the Supreme Court by the Justice Department and legal challengers.

Attorneys general from 15 Republican-led states, including Ohio, Florida and Idaho, filed a Supreme Court brief backing the challengers to the federal ban and urged the justices to resolve the division, or “split,” between the circuit courts of appeals.

“Unlike a good whiskey,” the attorneys general wrote, “this split will not age well.”

The 5th Circuit ruling was a legal victory for the nonprofit Hobby Distillers Association and 4 of its 1,300 members who argued in court papers that people should be free to distill spirits at home, whether as a hobby or for personal consumption.

Robert Alt, president and chief executive officer of the Buckeye Institute think tank and a lawyer for the challengers, expressed enthusiasm that his clients “will have their day in court.”

“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,” Alt said.

The Fifth Circuit upheld a 2024 ruling by U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, Texas. The ruling barred federal authorities from enforcing the ban against the plaintiffs in that case.

The Justice Department, urging the justices to take up the case, emphasized the importance of protecting federal revenue.

“Congress restricted home distilling 160 years ago in response to an extensive history of evasion of the distilled-spirits tax,” Justice Department lawyers wrote.

“The government has a substantial interest in its authority to safeguard a significant source of tax revenue — a source that was used to pay Revolutionary War debts at the founding (of the nation) and now generates billions of dollars in tax revenue every year,” they wrote.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com