Liver transplantation (LT) for alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH) remains controversial due to concerns about candidate selection subjectivity, post-LT alcohol relapse, and the potential exacerbation of LT disparities. Our aim was to design, perform, and examine the results of a simulated selection of candidates for LT for AH. Medical histories, psychosocial profiles and scores, and outcomes of 4 simulation candidates were presented and discussed at 2 multidisciplinary societal conferences with real-time polling of participant responses. Candidate psychosocial profiles represented a wide spectrum of alcohol relapse risk. The predictive accuracy of four psychosocial scores, Dallas consensus criteria, sustained alcohol use post-LT, Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplant, and QuickTrans, were assessed. Overall, 68 providers, mostly academic transplant hepatologists, participated in the simulation. Using a democratic process of selection, a significant majority from both simulations voted to accept the lowest psychosocial risk candidate for LT (72% and 85%) and decline the highest risk candidate (78% and 90%). For the 2 borderline-risk candidates, a narrower majority voted to decline (56% and 65%; 64% and 82%). Two out of 4 patients had post-LT relapse. Predictive accuracies of Dallas, Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplant, and Quicktrans scores were 50%, while sustained alcohol use post-LT was 25%. The majority of voting outcomes were concordant with post-LT relapse in 3 out of 4 patients. When defining “success” in LT for AH, providers prioritized allograft health and quality of life rather than strict abstinence. In this simulation of LT for AH using a democratic process of selection, we demonstrate its potential as a learning model to evaluate the accuracy of psychosocial scores in predicting post-LT relapse and the concordance of majority voting with post-LT outcomes. Provider definitions of “success” in LT for AH have shifted toward patient-centered outcomes.