A federal appeals court has ruled that a 158-year-old ban on home distilling is unconstitutional, asserting it exceeded Congress’s constitutional authority to levy taxes.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled Friday in favor of the nonprofit Hobby Distillers Association and four of its 1,300 members. The group contended individuals should be free to distill spirits at home for personal use or as a hobby.

The prohibition traces to legislation enacted during Reconstruction in July 1868, intended to combat liquor tax evasion. Violators faced potential imprisonment of up to five years and fines of $10,000 under that law.

In a three-judge panel decision, Circuit Judge Edith Hollan Jones argued the prohibition failed to generate tax revenue while overstepping federal authority by criminalizing private activities without constitutional basis. Jones noted the government’s reasoning could theoretically permit Congress to outlaw any in-home activity—such as remote work or small businesses—that might evade taxation.

The ruling upholds a July 2024 decision by U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman in Fort Worth, Texas, which temporarily stayed its order pending appeal. The case was initiated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian legal group that has long challenged federal regulatory power. The Hobby Distillers Association, founded in 2013 by Rick Morris—who advocated for legalization through lobbying and litigation after congressional efforts stalled—faced opposition from larger commercial distillers who may have viewed home producers as potential competitors.

Jones stated: “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.”

Devin Watkins, a lawyer representing the Hobby Distillers Association, described the ruling as an important step in defining federal power limits. Andrew Grossman, who argued the non-profit’s appeal, called it “an important victory for individual liberty” enabling plaintiffs to “pursue their passion to distill fine beverages at home.” He added: “I look forward to sampling their output.”