Columbus, OH – Tuesday’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit tees up a circuit split with its ruling upholding the federal ban on home distilling under Congress’s taxing power and the Necessary and Proper Clause, which is in direct contrast with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s ruling eleven days ago overturning the 158 year-old federal ban on home distilling.

Robert Alt, President and Chief Executive Officer of The Buckeye Institute and an attorney for Mr. Ream in this case, issued the following statement: “John Ream will seek Supreme Court review of this decision, and looks forward to being vindicated.”

Andrew M. Grossman, Senior Legal Fellow at The Buckeye Institute and a partner at BakerHostetler, who presented Buckeye’s oral argument in the case, said, “This decision upholding the federal ban on home distilling creates a circuit split, and we anticipate the U.S. Supreme Court resolving the conflict between the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Sixth Circuits.”

The Buckeye Institute represents John Ream in Ream v. U.S. Department of Treasury and Scott McNutt, Rick Morris, Thomas O. Cowdrey III, John Prince III, and the Hobby Distillers Association in McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice.

# # #