UPDATE & NEW INFORMATION: Federal Government DID NOT Respond to Loss - Is Home Distilling NOW LEGAL?

[@jessesouthard4595]

02:23 homeboy in the background ate lawn.😂

[@RadiantRealmStudio]

Lmao

[@coreytaylor1673]

😂

[@trguitarlesson]

I was just about to drop the timestamp 😂 so good

[@mrmustachio6297]

Lmao

[@kyleaustinbrown]

Bro touched some grass! 😂

[@clintonhoush1088]

Signed up and thanks for the info following the is one. I always thought it was dumb as well - I can make mead, wine, beer, and/or even other things with STORE BOUGHT liquor to give to friends/family but cannot concentrate it down? This is especially in Colorado where you can purchase and grown your own cannabis but not spirits. Abolish the ATF and redact the all distilling laws at the federal level.

[@anthonygonzalez3308]

ATF is just a few years away from being completely useless and toothless org and i am so looking forward to that day

[@TheStraycat74]

the BATFE and no fun department has been useless since it's inception, but we are slowly pulling it's teeth, and hopefully it'll be gone some day.

[@NoName-yl3pb]

Very glad to see that the wannabe legislative body known as the BATFE took another L in court

[@matthewconnor5483]

Pretty soon PETA will be the only people left rolling around deleting pets.

[@eternalskeptic]

@@TheStraycat74 Not true! They took out that cult in Waco doing us all a favor.

[@get6149]

Hopefully some one challenges the E that everyone forgets

[@MYOB1321]

Fellow North Carolinian here. I just joined the HDA, if only to support their work, but maybe one day we can distill in NC as well.

[@jaybeeman3628]

I’m in nc to. 1 thing I believe in what they don’t know want hurt. Lol

[@GeckoHiker]

We can legally distill up to 200 gallons a year on our homestead in Missouri. We distill about six gallons of "vodka" a year for cleaning, sanitation, to prep surfaces for DIY projects, and just to ensure that we can. Clearly it might be cheaper to buy denatured alcohol or rubbing alcohol (a diffent chemical). But we like the home brewing aspect of homesteading and do brew beer and distill small batches of beer whiskey. Nothing that will threaten the livelihood of the State of Missouri.

[@osmodious8533]

Personal home use needs to legal, no reason to make it illegal other than to tax your freedom.

[@horseblinderson4747]

Exactly, & if it never crosses state lines the man should have zero business in it.

[@T3hderk87]

That's kind of odd... That's like if we were only able to own a firearm if we were a member of the NRA....

[@NoName-yl3pb]

This actually happened with firearms braces. Only members of the interest group that brought the suit were covered by the ruling.

[@T3hderk87]

@@NoName-yl3pb How convenient.

[@lukeinferno]

Noname - for now.

[@afhostie]

​@@T3hderk87that's how injunctions typically work. It's a temporary measure.

[@festerallday]

And the group is not required to disclose their member list. So it could be that we all belong to the group

[@zekiah2]

In Missouri you are allowed to produce up to 200 gallons for personal use Electing good State attorney generals is a great way to fight federal overreach

[@beeroquoisnation]

Any injunctive relief is delivered to the named plaintiffs. It's a first step toward open licensing.

[@Baptized_in_Fire.]

That sucks if true. Oi m8, you got a loicense for that still? Pfft. I never did haha

[@nustada]

Licenses are still asking for permission to exercise your rights. A license is not a victory.

[@Baptized_in_Fire.]

@@nustada exactly. It's actually a setback strategically.

[@beeroquoisnation]

@@nustada Agreed. I am not responsible for freedom's descent into illegality. I am pro-liberty.

[@Doubie.]

My state allows fee distillation at home for non commercial activities

[@jamesvickery308]

The reason that the injunction only applies to HDA members is what is called standing. The HDA sought injunctive relief on behalf of members.

[@OzarkStillWorks]

Great news, a step in the right direction.

[@verdatum]

I've been following this for over 20 years now. When I first started I looked for all sorts of ways to do legal distilling but never got anywhere. It's a ridiculous law; I'd have no problems paying any taxes asked, but so far there's been no mechanism to do it short of buying a commercial space and paying some insane permit fees, as I'm sure Clawhammer is well aware. So I'm extremely excited.

[@Baptized_in_Fire.]

I just did it illegally, allegedly. Lol. No one can prove that. I don't even own a still.

[@Pigtrapper]

It also cost an insane amount of money for a liscense. I looked into it... but didn't have 100k

[@jasonsnook2229]

Thank you! I joined the association earlier today and scoped out the TTB website and was quickly confused what options to explore. Your video helped tremendously

[@afhostie]

The ruling likely doesn't apply to you since you just joined.

[@markmanning2921]

A license is a permit to enage in COMMERCIAL activities. If I am not selling they have no authority to regulate it,

[@PumpkinKingXXIII]

SCOTUS held in Wickard v. Filburn that “if appellee's activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce and this irrespective of whether such effect is what might at some earlier time have been defined as 'direct' or 'indirect”

[@markmanning2921]

@@PumpkinKingXXIII Me distilling my own borubon (something I dont actually do) does not affect interstate commerce. Me, manufacturing my own firearms (ruled lawful) does not affect interstate commerce. Me, manufacturing teddy bears in east podunk idao and ONLY selling it in IDAHO does not affect interstate commerce. The federal government has no authority to regulate or tax any of these activities but the state my very well have that authority... MAYBE.

[@PumpkinKingXXIII]

@@markmanning2921the court feels that if a farmer raises corn for his own use does, then essentially anything you do to replace buying commercially available products affects commerce

[@markmanning2921]

@@PumpkinKingXXIII That would be exactly what blackstone would have referred to as "The art and finesse of the norman lawyers". I.E. HORSE FEATHERS,

[@afhostie]

​@@PumpkinKingXXIIIone of the absolute worst rulings. I can't wait for it to be overturned.

[@piazzonim]

Thanks for the update Kyle! Now a proud member of the HDA!

[@JimFosterVO]

Good progress, much to go. Sadly, my home state of Kansas similarly pretty much bans home distillation.

[@2Truth4Liberty]

Can you identify what Statutes you rely on? To my understanding, K.S.A. 41-401(a) allows it for personal use . . as long as you pay the tax (K.S.A. 41-407). And you do not even have to pay the tax IF your distilled alcohol is solely for use by a church or religious organization for sacramental purposes and uses.

[@MrGarycharters]

Land if the free. Its crazy. I live in New Zealand and i couldnt think of not being able to have a home distillery.

[@geneticdisorder1900]

Well this is the Communist States of Merika !

[@MrVirus9898]

Most permitting and policies around permitted does not happen directly from Congress, instead, an Agency will be tasked with executing a law, and "permits" are one tool for executing such laws. These policies are developed through Rule Making and Final Rules. Recently the Supreme Court upended agency Rule Making and allowed Final Rules to be challenged without a Judge grant deference to expert Agencies. So if the feds aren't responding, that tells me two things are going on: 1) The various federal agencies are not sure how to move forward with new Rules that reflect the judge's ruling. The old Final Rules will stand until new Final Rules are published OR until another Judge strikes down the old Final Rules directly. 2) Individuals may now apply for a Permit, but that does not mean Individuals are exempt from the Siting Criteria specified in a Final Rule or Policy. Yes, a regular person might be able to apply for a Permit, but unless their home is zoned properly, they are not likely to get a permit; same as a business . The heart of the HDA argument is, a person could get a business license (Sole Proprietorship, LLC, S-Corp) and qualify for a permit, but a person without a business license would not get a permit. If you intend to apply for a permit, then please review the criteria for that permit. All of that information is online in the Federal Register and US Code. It would be wise to get an LLC, S-Corp, or some other business registration to divide and protect your assets. But that is your decision and should be discussed with your CPA/Legal advisor.

[@adamhilbert8730]

HDA was the named plaintiff and they are entitled to relief. The law has not been enjoined. I am not a lawyer and this is my take based on listening to 2A case law.

[@GTIFabric]

They are hard at work figuring out a way to tax home distiller's.

[@ogr8bearded175]

I wonder how this impacts freezer distilling where you take a low % and drop the temperature enough to freeze the water and remove the ice thereby increasing the proof.

[@LoremasterYnTaris]

Ooh, that's a good question. I'd be interested in looking int that.

[@horseblinderson4747]

Arguably for home personal/co-op not for profit use not crossing state lines they shouldn't even be getting the $2.50/fifth tax.

[@imaginarymask]

It definitely shouldn't be taxed. There is no moral justification. The laws were implemented as a tyranny of the majority (those that have no interest in home/personal distilling) over the minority (those that want to exercise freedom to distill at home.) Alcohol has many redeeming qualities, foremost it can sanitize. Just for the ability to sanitize wounds it should have it's own amendment protecting it's production.

[@pastevensonjr]

Welcome to DC. Im down here in Fredericksburg with your gear.

[@garrymcgaw4745]

One step closer.Thanks for te update mate. 👍👍.

[@VETOTHEGWEDO]

Wait!! Making your own shine is illegal?? Nothing to see here folks just keep moving. Nope! Nothing shiny over here.

[@joearledge]

Just like the gAyTF's FRT "ban" the legal stay on that only applied to members of the plaintiff organization. In that case I think it was the NAGR.

[@MrJeffcoley1]

I’ve always been of the opinion, even if Home distilling is illegal as long as you aren’t selling and distributing your extremely unlikely to ever have any reason for law enforcement to know about it

[@varietasVeritas]

In Missouri you can distill 200 gallons a year for personal use😮😊😊😊😊

[@MasterPiffy]

Damn that's alot for a year

[@darknitethunder]

Who said that nothing good come out of DC anymore. I mean this is the best news I've heard in a long time. Three Cheers to HDA...🥃🥳🍻🇺🇲🎉

[@justGOLD7]

Actually, it was a federal judge in Texas not D.C. that did it.

[@darknitethunder]

@@justGOLD7 It's all the same to me man. The Dude in the Video had the USA Capital in the background. Don't you know Nothing?

[@justGOLD7]

@@darknitethunder I realize the guy on camera was in D.C., he said as much in case somehow the background wasn't enough. I was merely pointing out that the court case he was referencing occurred in Texas.

[@darknitethunder]

@@justGOLD7 Yes and I am fully aware of that myself. No Offense meant.

[@justGOLD7]

@@darknitethunder none taken, not one of the angry internet trolls. I just wanted to clarify the conversation.

[@batrider63]

I had to watch several times, distracted by the video bomb fail. 😂

[@teslapc]

Nice. Glad you’re having fun in DC. The finance and I were there recently and it was fun.

[@awendt13]

This is the closest I will ever get to watching the news.

[@te8037]

Sounds like BS. Sounds like the HDA wasted their time with this. Apply for a “commercial perm it” for your home? Yeah right, commercial permits for distilling are like 100k. How about no f--ing permit… Even if you wanted a permit to make your own fuel, look at the cost, that’s why nobody does it. Just legalize home distilling for f-- sake.

[@JohnPhilpott-q5k]

Well I don’t really care about the obsolete laws because they are never going to know what or when I’m brewing up batch. But the laws do need to be changed for the constitutional rights

[@Booger414]

So, this ruling is unconstitutional for some but not for all. Yeah, that makes sense. What this really means is that the judge and his ruling has no authority to declare something unconstitutional.

[@ie8443]

Taxed for producing something for personal use? Become ungovernable.

[@nat9909]

I am an alcoholic in recovery, and I strongly support the Texas judges' arguments for overturning this absolutely illegal and unjustified penalty. The government is exceeding its constitutional authority and should be defeated in this case. Almost all the alcohol in the United States is produced by a tiny monopoly of commercial distillers. If Americans are going to drink alcohol then they should be allowed to decide what kind. Duhh! The founding fathers would have been disturbed to see the erosion of our freedom to choose. The entire reason for the existence of the United States is to ensure personal freedoms from government intrusion.

[@chrisjohnson9645]

You can produce more serfs for the wealthy to exploit, and every other important thing you might do requires you to get permission from a government. Farming the serfs is the purpose.

[@DukeCannon]

If you're paying taxes, it ain't Shine. - Tennessean

[@BuildingADrink]

Great information, thanks.

[@PaulGriffin-ox1gp]

Nothing wrong with distilling as long as it's done right. I've seen good and bad. Government needs to stay out of our lives, because they cost us way to much in blood and money.

[@mikeholt2112]

Could you interview them and/or their lawyers live to find out more?

[@festerallday]

Anyone that supports the 2nd amendment have seen this exact ruling so many times. Pistol braces, bump stocks, etc. but only apply to the members of the groups that sued. But the group is not required to disclose theor member list. So its more of a general injuntion in practice

[@gusecheverri7439]

Federal ALWAYS takes precedents over state laws. States can only GIVE MORE freedoms. For example, weed is legal in some states but not federally. So if youre selling in a weed legal state you cant keep the money you made in a regular bank like wells fargo. It has to be a local bank that only operates within that state.

[@jimmythepirate494]

In short, purchasing traditional duty free under the table spirits is still the best bang for your buck and offers the least interference of government bureaucracy. The American way is almost *ALWAYS* better than the Uncle Sam way. Uncle Sam seems to intentionally forget that.

[@kaseyboles30]

I suspect they challenged the law as applied, which means the law stands, but just cannot be applied in circumstance that all members of that association meet. Or some such. I don't see another way to make sense of it, but I'm not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

[@glleon80517]

Kyle, the Injunction was filed on July 10. There is a stay of 14 days for the government to respond. July 10 plus 14 is July 24. Not September as you say in the video. What am I missing?

[@emmetleahy]

The 14 day stay was just a period before the injunction went into affect. The government has until September 9th to file an appeal. The HDA is the place to get up to date information. The link is in the video description.

[@nerdaccount]

I THINK that 14 days was for the government to stop the ruling, saying that it would cause harm. Since that is past the verdict is now in effect. By the September date, the gov will need to appeal the decision and that will be another court case.

[@ClawhammerSupply]

They have until Sept until they can’t appeal anymore. They had 14 day period when nothing was effective. Now the ruling is “effectively effective” unless they appeal before Sept.

[@ZombiePumps]

Been waiting on a video on this since it happened.

[@KenNelson-b1p]

When a commercial distillery is formed and applies for the license, it is my understanding that BATFU will do a serious inspection of the facilities to prevent a flaming accident with all that alcohol vapor. Will they still need to do this for our garages and basements if hobby distilling becomes legal with a permit?

[@etainepona4206]

The People are sovereign.

[@DavyDoo69]

END USER... License, permits are for "IF" you sell your spirits to another. It has always been lawful to do it at home for your own personal use = End User... Governments can control commerce, business, income, profit, or gain from production with intent to sell.

[@knighth2452]

You stumbled on the answer. They want their taxes.

[@2Truth4Liberty]

Trial courts do not set precedent (even for the same judge in the same court). Until precedent is set in Your jurisdiction, you better be prepared to go to court on your charges.

[@Leslie-es5ij]

Learned from my grandfather, ain't no law gonna stop me !

[@M0J0HAND]

The best part of this video is the kid in the background back flipping onto his face at 2:22.

[@justinheads5751]

The only way I would support the findings in this case, is if the commerce clause issue was deemed to be fatal to the restrictions, and any categorically similar restrictions for any and all substances. They can still restrict substances as needed, but not through a false application of the commerce clause. They'd actually have to justify each substance and pass laws. If that's not where this ends up, this ends up in injustice.

[@StephenShreds]

if it only applies to the HDA members then just do what you want. same with braces and fpc. you cant say a certain group gets to own because they are a part of an association.

[@PumpkinKingXXIII]

One less power that the ATF can enforce. Looks like it time to massively cut their budget

[@richardk6695]

Lol the ambulance aire I thought I was losing my mind

[@LantzBrauBrewery]

Dang, that's close to where I live! Would've loved for you to stop by so I could give you and Emmett a case of my Strawberry Orange Belgian Tripel bottles that started conditioning last week. I assume that you and the fam are back in Asheville already though. Cheers and Prost, regardless!

[@ClawhammerSupply]

Short trip. Fun though.

[@kevinfidler8074]

It's a start

[@a3970010]

I agree that this is progress from a legal standpoint, but nobody should have to pay taxes on alcohol that they produce at home for themselves and are not going to sell.

[@newassistance238]

Not sure how its commercial at all if its for personal consumption only...seems like you need a new case to stop that classification as well no frderal license or tax should be needed period

[@bencruz563]

Its always a noble thing to ignore government.

[@MetalGuru785]

The goose at 2:24

[@kinzieconrad105]

Always has been! Only illegal to sell home brew! And thats been the rule, oh forever!

[@rairai3517]

I brewed wine at home many years ago .......just saying......

[@nat9909]

The original authority was about untaxed interstate liquor sales and was supposed to deter that. They are illegally using a law against interstate bootleggers and applying it unjustly to American people who are engaging in their right to produce their own stuff for their own consumption. This law should have never been enacted.

[@kingmasterlord]

oh so we can ferment table scraps for fuel alcohol? switch to diesel yall!

[@joearledge]

Daily reminder, Free Men don't ask permission.

[@dustinlight4716]

@legaleagle needs to do a review of this issue.

[@pick4u2]

not about to pay a tax, or a permit, its my right to do what I want in my home long as I don't hurt anyone else or selling it to others,, gvmnt, get out of my business

[@PressRecord777]

Constitutional or not, no way NFPA and insurance companies ever let residential stills fly.

[@PortlyGentleman]

nice job

[@captnron59]

People can distill at home, it's the sell without the government getting a cut that is against the law

[@ScottButler-q1h]

I had the liquor fairy stop by once.....

[@highcottonhoneybeecompany3299]

They SHOULDNT have to apply for anything!

[@DWCStuff]

So let me get this straight I get the permit so I can do my own at home and I'm not going to sell it and I still have to pay the government $2 and some change for every bottle I make

[@MrAcuta73]

Precedent.....it's all about Precedent. Once the first domino falls...the rest will follow.

[@ourlifeinwyoming4654]

Will it be as fun when it’s “legal”?

[@codymills4101]

We shouldn't even need a permit.

[@tbjtbj4786]

Oh you were not supposed to do that?

[@lanceparker4524]

it's now past September, what happened?

[@kingdarkem]

Huh sounds like state laws need to be challenged. Especially since the constitution has a supremacy clause. I like to call it the shit rolls down hill law. Constitutional law supersedes federal law. Federal law supersedes state law. State law supersedes county law. County law supersedes town law. Town law supersedes HOAs. Per the constitution any law that bumps up against a higher powered law and conflicts with the higher powered law is null and void. Article 6 section 2. I'll provide an example. In US history black americans under state laws were subjected to black codes and later him crow laws which were struck down because federal law stated they were supposed to under the constitution be treated equally instead of their vote being 3/5ths of a vote to your one whole vote. The state laws ran in defiance of federal law and got smacked down for it. So I would think if Tennessee had a state law saying you cant distill at home and this challenge just changed federal law stating that you can with the proper federal permits then Tennessees law is no longer valid. Id be interested if you pointed this out to the HDA and if it perks up their lawyers eyebrow. However I will add this caveat. I'm a laymen not a lawyer....just based if high school civics classes...

[@UniversityUTube]

The government should need a license to transport on my freedom

[@finspin4984]

Kyle just happens to be in DC?? Sus

[@JoeSteffy1932]

That kid in the background! 😂😂😂

[@KennyFuckingBlackwell]

Cut the funding to ATF ! CUT THE FAT ! TAX TAX & MORE TAX !

[@Warriors_Garden_and_Workshop]

this is America, you have your rights....but you need to get a permit and pay taxes on your rights to exercise your rights.

[@deckerhand12]

Why isn’t AHA jumping on this

[@varietasVeritas]

Will that crazy $250,000 tax be the next unconstitutional piece of shit to get flushed?

[@stampede18ecs]

This is why I love ohio we can make a certain amount of moon shine for personal use legally

[@Ozmandius]

A tax for every 750ml made huh. Guess ill only distill 700ml a year. What about those other bottles you say? Can't you read the writing on the bottles? I made them in previous years!

[@zinovyrozhestvensky652]

can i invest in your companies stocks?

[@EyeKnowRaff]

I'm not a lawyer bc I don't even like the taste of blood but, it sounds like this sets up a special class in that only members of the HDA can now do this stuff which is unconstitutional. 🤷‍♂️ Step in the right direction though, I guess.

[@ev6558]

YEEEE HAWWW BILLYBOB DA GUBMINT DONE LOST YEEEEEEEEEEEE

[@Frank-dt1kq]

Pfffft permit

[@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket]

I mean distilling has always been legal, just don't tell them.

[@ReDivineMan]

Lol flat out prove only some have their constitutional rights… sometimes. If you’re a U.S. CITIZEN 14a RESIDENT

[@MaxedHardware]

This honestly seems like a way for the HDA to make money and quite stupid. I understand that its a goal to make it legal for everyone but does not seem like it the way you are describing it.