US appeals court declares 158-year-old home distilling ban unconstitutional

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/apr/11/appeals-court-ruling-home-distilling-ban-unconstitutional

US appeals court declares 158-year-old home distilling ban unconstitutional

Judge said ban, which originated in Reconstruction era to thwart liquor tax evasion, actually reduced tax revenue

The Guardian

In Norway alcohol is very expensive, so many people distill at home illegally.

Every travel guide tells you to not accept home-distilled drinks, since they can be poisonous.

Anything that decants below 78.4C is going to have methanol in it, I usually separate out the first 100ml or so that decants after 78.4C to play it safe.

I've been doing it for about 20 years, no poisoning cases yet. Home distillation has been legal in NZ since 1996.

This doesn’t make sense. Whether or not you have methanol depends on what you are distilling from. Distillation doesn’t create methanol and many sources of ethanol contain negligible methanol.

TBH, your assertion reads like chemistry word salad. It doesn’t parse.

Everyone is talking in circles.

As distillation continues the concentration of methanol drops.

The highest concentration is at the start. This is also generally full of undesirable flavours.

People also forget that ethanol competitively inhibits metabolism of methanol in a way that protects healthy adults from toxicity.

A safe alcoholic drink can have methanol in it, iirc it's about 80:1 ethanol:methanol by EU rules. And generally considered tolerable [0].

What is actually toxic is much higher ratios of methanol than that.

Unless you have severely f'd up your fermentables you shouldn't even have that much methanol in the starter!

This is why everyone is disagreeing with the safety in this thread.

It's also why people wonder why so many tourist destinations have been mixing methanol into alcoholic drinks. They probably could serve drunk people high concentrations relying on ethanol already in their blood and follow up drinks to stop noticeable harm.

Probably most adults could drink 5-10% methanol (if ethanol is about 50%) and never notice the toxicity.

[0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11926610/

Defining a tolerable concentration of methanol in alcoholic drinks - PubMed

Methanol, a potent toxicant in humans, occurs naturally at a low level in most alcoholic beverages without causing harm. However, illicit drinks made from "industrial methylated spirits" [5% (v/v) methanol:95% (v/v) ethanol] can cause severe and even fatal illness. Since documentation of a no-advers …

PubMed
Genuine q then. Why don't the destinations serve watered down shots instead? If it is just to save money.

Probably because a- people can tell, and b- you sell more to already drunk people, so getting them drunk sooner is better.

So maybe the answer is water down the shots of your obviously drunk customers.

Ah I didn't realise methanol had the same psychological effect. I thought it was just tasteless poison.

I've never tasted it but from what I remember from high school chemistry class, it certainly smelled close enough to other alcohols, so I assume it would taste close enough as well.

TBH, I also had to do my own bit of googling because I barely drink alcohol to begin with, but it does look like "at the start", it's not very distinguishable from ethanol in taste and in effect.

If ethanol and methanol were readily distinguishable by taste, much fewer people would have died or gone blind drinking moonshine.

Whatever subtle differences exist between them are probably unnoticeable to people who are already drunk, not to mention drinking cocktails with all sorts of other flavors mixed in.