Anyone applying for or holding a liquor license is entitled to a hearing if they’re denied. That doesn’t change just because it’s Trump. I do liquor licensing in a different state and you really can’t just take it away without due process. He may well get to keep the licenses, because his conviction wasn’t related to liquor laws, and for us, that’s one of the only times we can revoke one. This is really not a case of him getting special treatment.
In this instance? Probably. We just had a hearing for a guy charged with bigamy and DV, and he got to renew his license. We have another guy who owns a bar (thank god not in my city) that’s known for being a dangerous removed, and he keeps getting licensed somehow. Most liquor laws make it pretty hard to essentially take away someone’s livelihood, regardless of what you or I think about it. I wish it was treated as more of a privilege than it is, but Trump is far from the only felon with a liquor license.
I searched “Bigamy and DV charge” first; then searched “DV charge” before I got my answer. I’m just saying that you’re not the only one who didn’t know the acronym
If I had scrolled another comment down, I would’ve had my my answer. So I appreciate ya asking for everyone else who doesn’t know
So if someone is convicted of like a gun crime or rape or murder as long as they were sober at the time they can keep their liquor license? What if they are in jail? Can a person own a bar, get convicted of homicide in the first degree, and keep with bar open with their license even if they are behind bars?
I’m not questioning this case, I’m just curious since if only liquor crimes can take a way a license that brought a lot of questions to my mind .
So the short answer is that it’s complicated. Long answer is (with the caveat that I’m not an attorney and we have one that guides our licensing board) that those are crimes of moral turpitude, which are considered when evaluating a new application or renewal. Per state law, the existence of a conviction isn’t enough on its own to deny the license - the board has to consider things like length of time since the crime and the applicant’s conduct since then. I genuinely have no idea what would happen if someone was in jail. I mean, I’m sure their license would be denied, I’m just not sure if they’d even be allowed to renew or maintain ownership in the first place. It’s never come up. More than likely, they’d sell it or transfer ownership before it ever came to me.
I don’t know NJ liquor laws, but if they’re similar, I can see them saying sorry, the conviction was too recent and you’ve shown zero remorse, no license for you. That said, I have no idea if Trump, individually is considered an owner, or if the license is under a subsidiary company where everyone knows it’s ultimately his, but he’s not involved in any of the day to day, so the establishment can remain licensed. Frankly, it’s not going to hurt him as much as the people who will lose their jobs if the license goes, but I’ll be interested to see what happens.
So, still no consequences.
Anyone applying for or holding a liquor license is entitled to a hearing if they’re denied. That doesn’t change just because it’s Trump. I do liquor licensing in a different state and you really can’t just take it away without due process. He may well get to keep the licenses, because his conviction wasn’t related to liquor laws, and for us, that’s one of the only times we can revoke one. This is really not a case of him getting special treatment.
I’m sure he’ll be treated like all other convicted felons
Lololol
In this instance? Probably. We just had a hearing for a guy charged with bigamy and DV, and he got to renew his license. We have another guy who owns a bar (thank god not in my city) that’s known for being a dangerous removed, and he keeps getting licensed somehow. Most liquor laws make it pretty hard to essentially take away someone’s livelihood, regardless of what you or I think about it. I wish it was treated as more of a privilege than it is, but Trump is far from the only felon with a liquor license.
Maybe you’re right but if so, this would be the one time he’s treated like everyone else.
What is DV anyhow?
I searched “Bigamy and DV charge” first; then searched “DV charge” before I got my answer. I’m just saying that you’re not the only one who didn’t know the acronym
If I had scrolled another comment down, I would’ve had my my answer. So I appreciate ya asking for everyone else who doesn’t know
Domestic Violence
So if someone is convicted of like a gun crime or rape or murder as long as they were sober at the time they can keep their liquor license? What if they are in jail? Can a person own a bar, get convicted of homicide in the first degree, and keep with bar open with their license even if they are behind bars?
I’m not questioning this case, I’m just curious since if only liquor crimes can take a way a license that brought a lot of questions to my mind .
So the short answer is that it’s complicated. Long answer is (with the caveat that I’m not an attorney and we have one that guides our licensing board) that those are crimes of moral turpitude, which are considered when evaluating a new application or renewal. Per state law, the existence of a conviction isn’t enough on its own to deny the license - the board has to consider things like length of time since the crime and the applicant’s conduct since then. I genuinely have no idea what would happen if someone was in jail. I mean, I’m sure their license would be denied, I’m just not sure if they’d even be allowed to renew or maintain ownership in the first place. It’s never come up. More than likely, they’d sell it or transfer ownership before it ever came to me.
I don’t know NJ liquor laws, but if they’re similar, I can see them saying sorry, the conviction was too recent and you’ve shown zero remorse, no license for you. That said, I have no idea if Trump, individually is considered an owner, or if the license is under a subsidiary company where everyone knows it’s ultimately his, but he’s not involved in any of the day to day, so the establishment can remain licensed. Frankly, it’s not going to hurt him as much as the people who will lose their jobs if the license goes, but I’ll be interested to see what happens.
I’ve learned a lot from your comments, much appreciated!
Interesting, thanks for the info
You’re mistaking consequences for unilateral penalties absent of due process.
He’s facing a whole ton of consequences, like 500 million of them.