This morning the Supreme court decided 5-4 to overturn laws in New York and Michigan which restricted the shipment of out-of-state wines. From Associated Press:
"States have broad power to regulate liquor," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority. "This power, however, does not allow states to ban, or severely limit, the direct shipment of out-of-state wine while simultaneously authorizing direct shipment by in-state producers.
"If a state chooses to allow direct shipments of wine, it must do so on evenhanded terms," he wrote in an opinion joined by the Justices.
The question now is whether or not the states will continue the fight against direct shipping. Elliot Spitzer, Attorney General for the State of New York, has long been a proponent of centralized control of alcohol distribution and argued:
New York has concluded that direct shipment of alcoholic beverages
into the State by unlicensed entities would significantly
impede enforcement of its laws by creating an unregulated
channel for the sale of alcohol. Accordingly, it requires that
all alcohol sold for consumption within the State pass through
the hands of least one licensed entity with an in-state
presence. This rule is not only reasonable, but essential...
The Supreme Court decided that The Commerce Clause did indeed take preeminence over the 21st Amendment in this application. Here it is from the horse's mouth:
It is evident that the object and design
of the Michigan and New York statutes is to grant in-state
wineries a competitive advantage over wineries located
beyond the States borders.
We hold that the laws in both States discriminate
against interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce
Clause, Art. I, §8, cl. 3, and that the discrimination is
neither authorized nor permitted by the Twenty-first
Amendment.
I look forward to WSWA's response which will undoubtedly condemn the "Activist judges with no regard for the safety of patriotic American children".
I have high hopes that this will be the impetus for a complete reform of the distribution system in this country. American consumers deserve more choice and efficiency; this decision will help to make wine a more modern and vital industry...
Gary:
Great news for those of us who have dealt with out of state consumers on a day to day basis. As the wholesalers in California (and elsewhere) have demonstrated it is possible to make money in a state where wineries can ship directly to the consumer. This is a great victory for the mom and pop wineries that are so important for our industry.
Great news for those of us who have dealt with out of state consumers on a day to day basis. As the wholesalers in California (and elsewhere) have demonstrated it is possible to make money in a state where wineries can ship directly to the consumer. This is a great victory for the mom and pop wineries that are so important for our industry.
Posted by: Gary Long | May 17, 2005 at 07:50 AM