A win for home distilling in the courts

[Pb]

A court just held that congress has no power to ban home distilling...!   

I would be awesome if this win sticks.

https://reason.com/volokh/2024/07/11/court-holds-federal-ban-on-home-distilling-exceeds-congress-enumerated-powers/

[Angel Eyes]

Great. 

At the rate things are going, we're going to need to make our own.

[Northwoods]

I have been wanting to make my own scotch style whisky. Maybe now I'll be able to without risking my security clearance.

[Pb]

Because "Congress's authority under the taxing power is limited to requiring an individual to pay money into the Federal Treasury," id. at 574, it follows that any law that does not require one to pay money into the treasury is not a exercise of the taxing power.

Machine guns, anyone?   

[AZRedhawk44]

Because "Congress's authority under the taxing power is limited to requiring an individual to pay money into the Federal Treasury," id. at 574, it follows that any law that does not require one to pay money into the treasury is not a exercise of the taxing power.

Machine guns, anyone?   

Also the "recreational pharmaceutical" market.

[HankB]

Because "Congress's authority under the taxing power is limited to requiring an individual to pay money into the Federal Treasury," id. at 574, it follows that any law that does not require one to pay money into the treasury is not a exercise of the taxing power.

Machine guns, anyone?   

MAYBE a path forward to remove the post '86 ban, but IANAL so I can't say for sure. I know I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the post '86 MG ban to be thrown out.

I don't see any effect on tax stamp requirements.

[Northwoods]

MAYBE a path forward to remove the post '86 ban, but IANAL so I can't say for sure. I know I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for the post '86 MG ban to be thrown out.

I don't see any effect on tax stamp requirements.

Nixing the post-'86 ban would be a good start.  It would bring the price of giggle factories back down to something normies can actually afford. When an MP5 can be bought for $2k (or whatever the semi only versions go for these days) a lot more people will buy them, and them being "in common use" will become a viable argument.

[Boomhauer]

Getting rid of the 86 ban would be a huge step

[dogmush]

Sure it's unconstitutional, but every week of Bidenomics makes the $200 tax stamps less of a burden.

[cordex]

Sure it's unconstitutional, but every week of Bidenomics makes the $200 tax stamps less of a burden.

Only if your income is increasing almost as fast as prices.

[HankB]

Nixing the post-'86 ban would be a good start.  It would bring the price of giggle factories back down to something normies can actually afford. When an MP5 can be bought for $2k (or whatever the semi only versions go for these days) a lot more people will buy them, and them being "in common use" will become a viable argument.

I think semi auto HK MP5s are going for about $3.5k, but some "good" clones - Zenith supposedly sells "good" clones - are closer to the $2k mark. (Not having had either, I can't endorse either.) A  transferable pre-86 HKMP5 / HKMP5SD is supposedly around $30k - $60k, depending on whether it's all HK or a clone with a transferable pre-86 FA trigger pack.

[cordex]

If it were legal to register them, I’d get a full auto AR lower or two, maybe a 10/22 and some kind of decent sub gun. Just for fun.

[Northwoods]

If it were legal to register them, I’d get a full auto AR lower or two, maybe a 10/22 and some kind of decent sub gun. Just for fun.

A belt fed .22 would be soooooo much fun, and affordable to shoot.

[French G.]

Sure it's unconstitutional, but every week of Bidenomics makes the $200 tax stamps less of a burden.

Which makes it clear that in the 30s the $200 tax was a de facto ban.

[French G.]

As for the alcohol, does it even taste good if you got permission first?