![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.adn.com\/resizer\/v2\/F4ZWXOUXLNA6LELMOCD53YDRCQ.JPG?auth=df6f5c7813656a60b5f79029e179d644dc69007abba98524ba6d538af660b4db&width=800&height=533\")
An Anchorage Superior Court judge on Wednesday ruled against a portion of a state law that had strictly limited entertainment options for Alaska breweries. <\/p>\n
The decision<\/a> by Judge Adolf Zeman is a win for Alaska breweries, wineries and meaderies that have been limited to four permitted events a year, said Donna Matias, the lead attorney on the case for the Pacific Legal Foundation.<\/p>\n It means breweries have the legal right to regularly host expressive entertainment such as live music, dancing, karaoke or playing a big sports game on the TV, without acquiring a permit from state regulators. <\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s a significant victory\u201d for brewing establishments, Matias said. <\/p>\n \u201cThe court found that they are free to exercise their First Amendment and free speech right to host activity on their premises, just like bars have been doing all along,\u201d Matias said. <\/p>\n It\u2019s also a victory for musicians and other entertainers who need places to perform, she said. <\/p>\n The decision comes during a difficult time for the industry. Since 2024, rising costs and a decline in drinking have helped push four breweries and a meadery out of business in Alaska. <\/p>\n [Struggling small breweries blame rising costs and \u2018draconian\u2019 state restrictions]<\/i><\/a><\/p>\n In that same period<\/a>, a state law went into effect that provided new growth opportunities for breweries. <\/p>\n But the law also contains limits that don\u2019t exist for bars or other venues. <\/p>\n The entertainment limits in particular removed an important option to boost sales, several operators said. <\/p>\n They were also cumbersome. <\/p>\n They required a $100 permit, a trip<\/a> to the local police department, approval from the Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office<\/a> and other steps. <\/p>\n Shortly after the law went into effect, three operators sued over the entertainment restrictions. The argued<\/a> that the limits put them at an unconstitutional disadvantage against bars and other establishments. <\/p>\n The plaintiffs were Zip Kombucha in South Anchorage, along with Homer businesses Sweetgale Meadworks & Cider House and Grace Ridge Brewing Co.<\/p>\n Jason Davis of Sweetgale Meadworks & Cider House said that under the pre-2024 law, brewing establishments like his could not host entertainment events.<\/p>\n But the newer law was still \u201conerous,\u201d providing only four chances a year for entertainment, which took lots of time and paperwork.<\/p>\n As a result, Sweetgale never hosted musicians during five years<\/a> in business, he said. <\/p>\n But now, he\u2019s already trying to line up the first musicians, starting next month with some folk music. <\/p>\n \u201cPartly just to celebrate this decision by the court,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n Steven Stead, co-owner of Grace Ridge Brewing Co., said Thursday that his brewery had also declined to provide live music and other entertainment because of the permitting requirements.<\/p>\n \u201cHaving the restriction on live music really kind of hurt us, and pushed even more events to bars and other spots that were, I would say, less family-oriented and less community-oriented,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n Now, Grace Ridge can provide some live music this summer as tourists flood into town.<\/p>\n \u201cDo I see it being every Friday night, probably not,\u201d he said. \u201cBut it\u2019ll be a way to offer more special events and bring the community together.\u201d <\/p>\n Judge Zeman wrote in his decision that constitutional protections for free speech extend \u201cbeyond written and spoken word to include other mediums of expression including music, video, and live performances.\u201d <\/p>\n The state had argued that the entertainment limits \u201cwere enacted not exclusively for public safety reasons, but also as a part of a grand compromise in a years-long turf war waged\u201d between breweries, bars and other establishments, Zeman wrote. <\/p>\n The state has a substantial government interest in regulating the alcohol industry, but it does not trump the constitutionally protected free-speech rights in this situation, he wrote.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Alaska Constitution affords its people greater 1st Amendment protections than the United States Constitution in this arena,\u201d he wrote. <\/p>\n \u201cThe State constitution prohibits \u2018restricting, in places where liquor is sold, forms of expression which would otherwise be protected under the First Amendment,\u2019 \u201d he wrote, citing an Alaska Supreme Court case<\/a> from 1982. <\/p>\n Zeman also wrote that the \u201crestrictions on activities and displays are not narrowly tailored to serve public health and safety.\u201d <\/p>\n The state failed \u201cto present evidence establishing a connection between the restrictions on use of activities and displays in breweries and wineries and public health and safety,\u201d Zeman wrote. <\/p>\n \u201cInstead, Defendants assert that the restrictions were necessary to achieve a grand \u2018compromise\u2019 for market regulation in a highly competitive and quickly evolving industry, and that their purpose is to limit the competitiveness of brewery and winery retail spaces,\u201d he wrote. <\/p>\n \u201cThe Legislature can protect the public from the threats to health and safety posed by consumption at breweries and wineries, but limiting entertainment and suppressing free speech in these spaces is by no means necessary to achieving that goal, nor has there been any showing as to how limiting these activities protects public health or safety,\u201d he wrote. <\/p>\n The judge did not rule entirely in favor of the breweries.<\/p>\n Zeman said restrictions on the hosting of organized games or tournaments, such as pool tables or dart games, can remain in the law, \u201cto the extent that they do not include speech and expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment.\u201d<\/p>\n The complaint from the breweries targeted only the entertainment restrictions in the law. <\/p>\n Closing times of 9 p.m. at brewing establishments will continue. \u201cPour limits\u201d of 36 ounces for each customer, typically three beers, will also continue. <\/p>\n This is a developing story. Check back for updates.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.adn.com\/resizer\/v2\/D47XJBJIQJDIPBES7TWD5Y2AFU.JPG?auth=24865399cf9d154239cb69404d7dbb028ccdb39da87fd04815b459dd3e21729d&width=800&height=533\")