This is the Cater Daily Podcast for Monday, March 25th, 2024.

I'm Caleb Brown.

When Ohio entrepreneur John Reem wanted to engage in a new hobby, that of home distilling, he realized he'd be

committing a federal felony, so he's suing the Treasury Department for the right

to engage in this would-be hobby, and he's in part challenging a bizarre but long-standing interpretation of the

U.S. Commerce Clause. If Mr. Reim wins the right to engage in his hobby, it could mean big things

for federal regulation.

Mr Reims attorney is Robert Alt.

He explains why this case has big implications.

I have had the pleasure.

Well, maybe not the pleasure.

The bemusement of experience. the bemusement of explaining the Supreme Court's reasoning in the

Wickard v Philburn decision including to law students, and being met with utter disbelief that that was the reasoning

offered by the Supreme Court in that case that has enabled so much mischief at the federal level.

If you don't mind, can you characterize or at least give us a brief summary of what that reasoning was?

My pleasure to do so and I feel like as someone who runs the Bakai Institute

it's particularly appropriate that I should do so because

Wickered versus Philburn regrettably. I think one of the worst decisions in the history of the

United Supreme Court arises from Ohio and involves an Ohio farmer, Roscoe Philburn, who had a farm just outside of Dayton, Ohio, and during the Great Depression he grew a number of crops including winter wheat as part of the

Agricultural Adjustment Act, the federal government in an attempt to essentially cartilize farming and to regulate farm prices, put caps on the amount

of crops farmers could grow.

Farmer Philburn exceeded his quota, but an interesting tidbit is that the excess

...