What If Prohibition Never Ended?

The Actual History

The era of national Prohibition in the United States began on January 17, 1920, when the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution took effect, banning the "manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors." The amendment was the culmination of a century-long temperance movement that had gained significant momentum in the Progressive Era, with organizations like the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League advocating for a nationwide ban on alcohol. The Volstead Act, passed in October 1919 over President Woodrow Wilson's veto, provided the legal framework for enforcing Prohibition, defining "intoxicating liquors" as beverages containing more than 0.5% alcohol.

Contrary to popular expectations, Prohibition did not eliminate alcohol consumption in America. Instead, it drove the alcohol industry underground, creating a thriving black market. Speakeasies—illegal bars—proliferated across urban areas, with an estimated 32,000 operating in New York City alone by 1929. Organized crime seized the opportunity to supply this demand, with figures like Al Capone building criminal empires based largely on bootlegging operations. Capone's organization was reportedly earning $60 million annually from illegal alcohol sales by the late 1920s.

Law enforcement agencies struggled to effectively implement Prohibition. The federal government initially allocated just $6.3 million to the Prohibition Bureau and employed fewer than 1,550 agents to police the entire nation. Corruption became endemic, with many law enforcement officials accepting bribes to ignore violations. The court system became overwhelmed with Prohibition cases, which constituted over 75% of federal prosecutions by 1932.

By the late 1920s, public support for Prohibition had eroded significantly. The stock market crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression intensified opposition, as many Americans saw legalized alcohol as a potential source of tax revenue and jobs. The Association Against the Prohibition Amendment, founded in 1920, gained significant traction among business leaders and the wealthy who had initially supported Prohibition but had grown disillusioned with its consequences.

The 1932 presidential election marked a turning point, with Democratic candidate Franklin D. Roosevelt campaigning on a platform that included repealing Prohibition. Following his victory, momentum for repeal accelerated. On December 5, 1933, Utah became the 36th state to ratify the 21st Amendment, which repealed the 18th Amendment and ended the national Prohibition experiment after just 13 years.

The repeal of Prohibition returned control of alcohol regulation to individual states. Many implemented their own restrictions, with some counties and municipalities choosing to remain "dry." Oklahoma maintained statewide prohibition until 1959, and Mississippi remained dry until 1966. Even today, hundreds of counties across the United States maintain some form of local prohibition.

The legacy of Prohibition includes significant expansion of federal law enforcement powers, the entrenchment of organized crime in American society, and a lasting regulatory framework for alcohol. It also demonstrated the challenges of legislating morality and the unintended consequences that can arise from well-intentioned reforms. The era remains a cautionary tale about the limits of prohibition as a policy tool and the resilience of consumer demand in the face of legal restrictions.

The Point of Divergence

What if Prohibition never ended? In this alternate timeline, we explore a scenario where the 21st Amendment failed to gain the necessary support for ratification, and the United States remained officially "dry" long after 1933.

This divergence could have occurred through several plausible mechanisms. The most straightforward would involve the 1932 presidential election. Had Herbert Hoover defeated Franklin Roosevelt, the political momentum for repeal might have stalled. Alternately, even with Roosevelt's victory, the repeal movement could have faltered if powerful anti-repeal forces had successfully mobilized opposition in key states.

A more specific point of divergence might have occurred in March 1933, when Congress passed the Cullen-Harrison Act, which modified the Volstead Act to permit the sale of beer with 3.2% alcohol content. This legislation, which Roosevelt signed as one of his first presidential acts, offered Americans legal beer before full repeal. In our alternate timeline, perhaps the Supreme Court struck down this law as unconstitutional, dealing a significant psychological blow to the repeal movement.

Another plausible divergence point centers on the ratification process itself. The 21st Amendment required approval by state conventions rather than state legislatures, a unique approach designed to circumvent rural-dominated legislatures that supported Prohibition. If key states had selected more pro-Prohibition delegates to these conventions, or if the Anti-Saloon League and other temperance organizations had rallied more effectively, the amendment might have fallen short of the required 36 states needed for ratification.

Economic arguments were crucial to repeal in our timeline. During the Depression, proponents emphasized potential tax revenue and job creation from a legalized alcohol industry. In this alternate history, perhaps prominent economists or business leaders made compelling counterarguments that preserved Prohibition, such as data showing reduced absenteeism or healthcare costs in the dry era. Alternatively, a modest economic recovery in 1932-33 might have undermined the urgency of these economic arguments.

Religious opposition to repeal was significant in our timeline but ultimately insufficient. In this alternate scenario, perhaps a more coordinated interfaith coalition of Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish leaders maintained a united moral front against repeal, effectively framing continued Prohibition as a moral imperative during national hardship.

The critical divergence, regardless of its specific mechanism, results in the 21st Amendment falling just short of ratification—perhaps securing 32 or 33 states rather than the needed 36—leaving the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act intact as the United States moved forward into the mid-1930s and beyond.

Immediate Aftermath

Political Realignment

The failure to repeal Prohibition would have immediately reshaped American politics in the mid-1930s:

Roosevelt Administration Priorities: Without the successful repeal of Prohibition to demonstrate early effectiveness, the Roosevelt administration would have been forced to recalibrate its approach to the New Deal. FDR might have doubled down on economic recovery programs to compensate for this early legislative disappointment.
Republican Repositioning: The Republican Party, still reeling from electoral defeats, would likely have embraced the continued Prohibition as vindication of their moral stance. Herbert Hoover, despite his 1932 defeat, might have experienced partial rehabilitation as the president who "stood firm" on an issue where public sentiment ultimately remained divided.
Third Party Movements: The failure of both major parties to deliver repeal would have fueled third-party movements. A "Repeal Party" might have emerged, particularly strong in urban areas and among immigrant communities, potentially splitting Democratic votes in crucial districts during the 1934 midterms and 1936 presidential election.

Law Enforcement Evolution

The persistence of Prohibition would have necessitated substantial changes to enforcement approaches:

Federal Bureau of Enforcement: By 1935, mounting frustration with enforcement failures would likely have prompted a complete reorganization of the Prohibition Bureau into a more robust Federal Bureau of Enforcement with expanded powers, resources, and manpower. Annual funding might have quadrupled to over $25 million by 1936.
Technological Innovations: Law enforcement would have accelerated adoption of new technologies specifically to combat bootlegging. Radio networks, early surveillance equipment, and forensic techniques for identifying illicit alcohol would have received significant investment.
Coast Guard Expansion: With international smuggling remaining a primary source of illegal alcohol, the U.S. Coast Guard would have seen substantial expansion, potentially becoming one of the largest naval forces in the world by the late 1930s, with specialized vessels designed to intercept rumrunners.

Criminal Enterprise Adaptation

Organized crime would have evolved significantly in response to continued Prohibition:

Syndicate Consolidation: By 1936, the initial chaotic competition among bootlegging operations would have given way to more sophisticated criminal syndicates with quasi-corporate structures. Regional territories would become more formalized, reducing violent confrontations that attracted law enforcement attention.
Political Infiltration: Criminal organizations would have intensified efforts to control local and state political machines. In cities like Chicago, New York, and Boston, this influence might have extended to congressional representatives, creating a powerful "bootlegger lobby" working behind the scenes against enforcement efforts.
Technological Arms Race: Bootleggers would have continuously innovated to evade detection, developing more sophisticated distilleries, better concealment methods for transportation, and secure communication networks. By 1937, underground distribution networks might have resembled modern supply chain management systems.

Economic Implications

The continued ban on legal alcohol would have created significant economic ripples:

Tourism Industry Transformation: American tourism would have suffered internationally, while certain destinations might have thrived as "safe drinking havens." Border communities in Canada and Mexico would have boomed as Americans sought legal alcohol, creating economic zones dependent on "drinking tourism."
Underground Economy Growth: By 1936, economists estimate the illegal alcohol trade might have constituted between 3-5% of the entire American economy. This massive underground sector would have distorted economic statistics, complicated tax collection, and potentially masked the true state of recovery from the Depression.
Agricultural Impact: Farmers who might have transitioned to growing barley or other brewing ingredients instead continued struggling with agricultural commodities whose prices remained depressed. Certain grape varieties, however, would have seen demand soar for "medicinal" wine and home brewing purposes.

Social Adaptation

American society would have developed unique adaptations to continued Prohibition:

Drinking Culture Transformation: The speakeasy would have evolved from its initial form to more sophisticated establishments with elaborate security systems and membership protocols. By 1936, many major cities would have parallel social scenes—the public, dry world and the private, wet underground.
Class and Ethnic Divisions: Enforcement would likely have become increasingly targeted along class and ethnic lines. Working-class and immigrant neighborhoods would face aggressive raids, while wealthy enclaves would develop "gentleman's agreements" with local authorities to maintain discreet drinking establishments.
Medicinal Loopholes Expansion: The medical profession would have become increasingly entangled in alcohol distribution as "medicinal alcohol" prescriptions exploded. By 1935, specialized "prescription mills" might have emerged, with certain doctors writing thousands of alcohol prescriptions monthly.

These immediate adaptations would set the stage for more profound long-term changes as American society, government, and criminal enterprises adjusted to the reality of permanent Prohibition.

Long-term Impact

Political Transformation

The persistence of Prohibition would have fundamentally altered American political alignments through the 20th century:

The "Wet-Dry" Political Axis: By the 1950s, American politics would likely have developed a secondary political axis separate from the traditional liberal-conservative spectrum. Politicians would be classified not just as liberal or conservative but also as "wet" or "dry," with complex coalitions forming across these dimensions.
Constitutional Reform Movement: The difficulties of enforcing permanent Prohibition would have sparked a constitutional reform movement by the 1960s. This movement might have advocated for mechanisms to periodically review and potentially sunset constitutional amendments, fundamentally changing how Americans viewed their founding document.
Enforcement Federalism: States would have developed widely divergent approaches to Prohibition enforcement, creating a patchwork legal landscape. By the 1970s, "sanctuary states" might have emerged that effectively nullified federal Prohibition laws through non-enforcement, creating constitutional crises over federalism.
International Relations Strain: America's insistence on maintaining Prohibition would have complicated international relations, particularly with traditional wine-producing nations like France, Italy, and Spain. Trade negotiations would consistently stumble over alcohol-related restrictions, potentially limiting American economic integration with Europe.

Law Enforcement and Judicial System Evolution

The demands of perpetual Prohibition would have transformed American justice systems:

Surveillance State Acceleration: The need to monitor potential bootlegging activities would have driven early adoption of surveillance technologies. By the 1960s, America might have developed a domestic intelligence apparatus decades ahead of our timeline, with sophisticated wiretapping, financial monitoring, and informant networks.
Parallel Legal Systems: The judiciary would have evolved specialized courts and procedures for handling Prohibition cases. By the 1980s, a separate alcohol enforcement judicial track might exist alongside regular criminal courts, with different standards of evidence and sentencing guidelines.
Prison Population Explosion: Without the end of Prohibition, America's incarceration rate would have begun rising decades earlier than in our timeline. By 1970, the U.S. might have already achieved the highest incarceration rate globally, primarily driven by alcohol-related offenses.
Selective Enforcement Politics: Patterns of selective enforcement would have become politically explosive by the 1960s. The civil rights movement would likely have incorporated anti-Prohibition elements, as enforcement disproportionately targeted minority communities.

Criminal Enterprise Evolution

Organized crime would have developed along dramatically different lines with persistent Prohibition:

Corporate Evolution: By the 1960s, major bootlegging syndicates would have evolved organizational structures nearly indistinguishable from legitimate corporations, with professional management, research and development divisions, and sophisticated financial operations. The largest might have operated internationally with complex supply chains spanning multiple countries.
Corruption Institutionalization: Systemic corruption would have become so institutionalized in certain regions that parallel governance structures might have emerged. By the 1970s, in cities like Chicago or New Orleans, bootlegging syndicates might effectively control municipal services through shadow governments.
Technological Innovation: Continued cat-and-mouse games between bootleggers and authorities would have driven significant technological innovation. Underground alcohol production facilities by the 1990s might utilize automated systems, quality control laboratories, and sophisticated distribution logistics that rivaled legal industries.
Legitimization Strategies: By the 2000s, major criminal syndicates would have developed extensive legitimate business fronts. In some regions, these organizations might provide social services, healthcare, and even private security, gaining public acceptance and making enforcement increasingly difficult politically.

Economic Development Pathways

The American economy would have developed along significantly different lines:

Underground Banking System: The need to move and launder enormous sums of bootlegging money would have created sophisticated parallel financial systems. By the 1950s, these might have developed into alternative banking networks handling significant percentages of the national economy, undermining central banking effectiveness.
Alcohol Tourism Reversal: Rather than Americans traveling abroad for legal alcohol, by the 1970s America might have developed a thriving tourism industry based on its unique drinking culture. Wealthy international tourists might visit American cities specifically to experience the thrill of speakeasy culture that had disappeared elsewhere.
Technological Divergence: Research and development resources diverted to enforcement and evasion technologies would have created technological divergences from our timeline. America might have developed more advanced surveillance and forensic technologies earlier, while falling behind in consumer product development.
Taxation Crisis: By 2000, the massive underground economy would have created persistent taxation challenges. Federal revenue shortfalls might have necessitated higher taxation on legitimate businesses, creating competitive disadvantages and potentially limiting economic growth compared to our timeline.

Social and Cultural Transformations

American society would have evolved distinctive cultural patterns in response to permanent Prohibition:

Underground Cultural Renaissance: Speakeasy culture would have evolved into a sophisticated parallel society with its own art, music, literature, and social norms. By the 1960s, this "underwater" culture might have developed complex codes, rituals, and aesthetics that influenced mainstream culture while remaining technically illegal.
Religious Landscape Reshaping: Religious denominations' positions on Prohibition would have significantly influenced their growth trajectories. Denominations maintaining strict prohibitionist positions might have declined as younger generations rejected what they perceived as outdated moral codes.
Educational Divergence: By the 1980s, alcohol education would have diverged dramatically between official curriculum (emphasizing absolute abstinence) and practical underground knowledge. Most Americans would effectively live with dual educational frameworks—official prohibitionist knowledge and practical underground knowledge about responsible consumption.
Health Consequences: The lack of regulation on underground alcohol would have created public health challenges. Methanol poisoning, contaminated products, and uncertain potency would have remained persistent problems into the 21st century, potentially causing thousands of deaths annually.

Present Day (2025) Reality

By our present day in this alternate timeline, America would present a fascinating contrast to our world:

Enforcement Technology: American law enforcement would utilize advanced detection technologies aimed at identifying illicit alcohol production. Atmospheric analysis drones might patrol industrial areas detecting fermentation emissions, while data mining algorithms would flag suspicious supply purchases.
Political Landscape: A significant "Repeal Movement" would likely still exist, perhaps gaining renewed momentum among younger generations who see Prohibition as an archaic restriction. This movement might utilize digital technologies for organization and advocacy in ways the original temperance movements could never have imagined.
Global Position: America would stand as the world's only major nation maintaining alcohol prohibition, creating a distinctive national identity. This exceptionalism would color international relations, trade agreements, and cultural exchanges.
Underground Innovation: The century-long cat-and-mouse game between bootleggers and authorities would have driven remarkable innovations in concealment, production, and distribution. Modern speakeasies might utilize technologies like biometric authentication, encrypted communications, and autonomous delivery systems.

The persistence of Prohibition would have created an America recognizable in its fundamental structure but profoundly different in its social dynamics, economic structures, legal systems, and cultural expressions—a nation shaped by a century-long experiment in legislated morality that never ended.

Expert Opinions

Dr. Lisa Montgomery, Professor of American Constitutional History at Georgetown University, offers this perspective: "A permanent Prohibition would have fundamentally altered America's constitutional development trajectory. The inevitable tension between the 18th Amendment's absolutist language and practical enforcement realities would likely have prompted a series of Supreme Court cases gradually narrowing its scope. By the 1970s or 1980s, I believe we would have seen judicial interpretations effectively limiting Prohibition to commercial sales while permitting personal production and consumption—a kind of constitutional work-around short of formal repeal. This would have established precedents for flexible constitutional interpretation with far-reaching implications for other amendments, potentially creating a more 'living document' approach to constitutional law than we see even in our own timeline."

Mark Thornton, Ph.D., Senior Economic Historian at the Cato Institute, provides this economic analysis: "Permanent Prohibition would have created what economists call a 'dual economy' of unprecedented scale—a formally tracked legitimate economic sector alongside a massive untaxed, unregulated shadow economy. The economic distortions would have been profound. Government revenue would have suffered from both lost alcohol taxation and income tax evasion connected to underground activities. Meanwhile, enforcement costs would have created a persistent drain on public resources. My calculations suggest that by 2025, America's GDP in this alternate timeline might be 8-12% lower than in our world, with significantly higher public debt and more limited social services. Ironically, one positive outcome might have been a more restrained regulatory approach to other industries, as the government's limited capacity would have been disproportionately consumed by alcohol enforcement."

Jennifer Rodriguez, Criminal Justice Researcher and former DEA Intelligence Analyst, contributes this insight: "The persistence of Prohibition would have dramatically altered American criminal organizations' evolution. Rather than diversifying into narcotics trafficking in the 1940s and 50s as they did in our timeline, organized crime syndicates would have continued refining their alcohol operations. By 2025, I believe we'd see hyper-efficient, quasi-legitimate enterprises with sophisticated political protection mechanisms. The interesting paradox is that prolonged Prohibition might have actually reduced overall criminality in some dimensions. With criminal enterprises focused on meeting persistent consumer demand for alcohol—a relatively predictable market—we might have seen less diversification into more destructive criminal enterprises like human trafficking or arms dealing. However, the corruption of political and legal institutions would have been more profound and systematic, creating a troubling erosion of governmental legitimacy that would be extremely difficult to reverse."