Supreme Court

Can the Feds Ban You From Making Liquor in Your Own Home?

A challenge to the federal prohibition on home distilling could give the Supreme Court a chance to rein in Congress’ Commerce Clause power.

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 9.12.2026 7:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google

Media Contact & Reprint Requests

(Photo: DPST/Newscom)

John Ream is trying to do something that should be straightforward: distill his own alcohol. Since the Founding of our country, Americans have sought to distill spirits on their own property for personal consumption. Nearly every famous Founding Father—from George Washington to James Madison to Patrick Henry—distilled spirits on their land, and in modern times, activities like homebrewing have been legalized for decades.

For over a century and a half, however, home distilling has been illegal. The Supreme Court could soon step in.

The trouble dates back about a century and a half ago. In 1868, Congress made it a crime to use or possess a still or boiler for the purpose of distilling spirits "in any dwelling house, or in any shed, yard, or inclosure connected with such dwelling house." The purported reason for the ban was to facilitate collecting tax revenue from authorized commercial distillers. While hobby distillers have long criticized this federal distilling ban, it is now receiving renewed attention, particularly in terms of what it says about the federal government's power in America today.

In 2024, Ream, with the help of the Buckeye Institute, challenged the federal distilling prohibition. After all, if Congress can prohibit Ream from making a product for personal consumption within his own home, where would the federal government's power end?

In response, the federal government has advanced two main arguments to defend the ban: first, that the ban is authorized under Congress' Article I taxing power, and second, that it's permissible........

© Reason.com