(The Center Square) – A central Ohio man’s challenge of the federal government’s claim someone must break the law to test a law got heated in an appeals courtroom.
The lawsuit centers around Licking County’s John Ream, owner of a brewing company and wantimg to distill small amounts of liquor at home for his consumption. Before starting the process, he sued to end the federal government’s ban on the process.
“The government failed to answer the court’s reasonable request to address the merits of this case, which is telling,” said Andrew M. Grossman, a senior legal fellow at The Buckeye Institute and a partner in BakerHostetler’s Washington, D.C., office.
BakerHostetler presented the argument before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as a lead attorney on the case.
On Tuesday, the court sent a letter to the U.S. government telling it the three-judge panel wanted to discuss the merits of the constitutional claims. The government has argued Ream has no standing to bring the case because he never distilled his home liquor and did not violate the law.
The District Court ruled that Ream lacks standing because he has not actually suffered a legal injury from the federal prohibition.
The government said Ream could go through the permitting process, and if denied, then sue.
However, the three-judge panel took issue with the government’s failure to brief it on the actual merits of the case, rather than only standing, saying “trying to push around this court is not the answer.”
When questioned about the merits, U.S. Appellate Attorney Caroline Tan responded by saying she could only respond in a limited way because the government did not brief on the merits.
“I think that as a matter for respect for this court, when an issue is fully joined by the other side, you should brief it for us,” said Judge Raymond Kethledge. “We wear the robes in the courtroom, not the civil appellate division. I would ask you to tell your colleagues back there this is not acceptable.”
Tan said if the court wants to get into the issue of a law that’s been on the books for more than 150 years, she wanted a chance to offer another brief. Kethledge told her she already had the chance.
“The oral argument was at times a bit heated, especially when the government was at the lectern, but the stakes are high,” said Robert Alt, president and chief executive officer of The Buckeye Institute and the other lead attorney on the case. “The constitutional rights of all Americans are before the court. We hope Ohio’s own John Ream will prevail with his desire to one day lawfully distill spirits in his own home for his own consumption and are honored to represent him in this important case.”
National groups like Americans for Prosperity Foundation, Cato Institute, Center for Individual Rights, Liberty Justice Center and the Southeastern Legal Foundation each filed amicus briefs with the U.S. Court of Appeals in support of Ream.
