California’s Caffeinated Beer Ban Signed Into Law

Takes effect January 1.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/02/california-caffeinated-beer-ban_n_916192.html

Sounds like it includes coffee beers and the like (with natural sources of caffeine rather than artificially added caffeine), based on some of the examples it gives in the article, though the article doesn’t explicitly say that it does.

What a bunch of nonsensical, well-intentioned garbage.

Because 4 Loko isn’t going to switch to Guarana or some other "stay awake" ingredient for the California market.

Then again, nothing says that Speedway etc. couldn’t be made with decaffienated coffee.

Someone needs to violate that ban and challenge the shit out of it. Peter Zien used to be a lawyer, so I nominate Alesmith.

Speedway and Victory-at-Sea. Damn.

Better start stocking up.

No more speedway in CA? Is this for real?

Wow, whoever wrote this is one really terrible reporter. Didn’t even bother to read what the bill says.

Under this new law, coffee beers are still good. The early version of the bill could have been construed to include those that used coffee, chocolate, etc. But it was amended during the process to apply only to "Beer to which caffeine has been directly added as a separate ingredient."

FWIW, here’s a link to the text of the new law.

Everyone can relax. Coffee stouts are still OK.

Lame. Bring back caffeined four loko.

yikes

Originally posted by WesKBob
Wow, whoever wrote this is one really terrible reporter. Didn’t even bother to read what the bill says.

Under this new law, coffee beers are still good. The early version of the bill could have been construed to include those that used coffee, chocolate, etc. But it was amended during the process to apply only to "Beer to which caffeine has been directly added as a separate ingredient."

FWIW, here’s a link to the text of the new law.

Everyone can relax. Coffee stouts are still OK.

really?

To me that reads as Speedway Stout for instance being proscribed by this bill for adding caffeine as a separate ingredient in the form of espresso.

If the language were to be unambiguous, it should have read "alcoholic beverages to which caffeine in a purified form has been added". "A separate ingredient" can still mean coffee, cocoa, etc. to any lawyer worth his salt.

Can you imagine if the same interpretation were allowed for the active agent in marijuana? "Well hey, we didn’t add THC as a separate ingredient, we just added cannabis and the THC got there incidentally."

What if MSG were outlawed? "Well we just added autolyzed yeast as a separate ingredient. The MSG got there incidentally."


Something tells me this may fly as optimists suggest.

Am I the only one annoyed that they are referring to Four Loko as beer?

Also, the article has been "corrected."