The Associated Press reported May 16 that the high court ruled 5-4 to strike down laws banning interstate wine sales -- typically conducted via the Internet -- as discriminatory and anticompetitive. "States have broad power to regulate liquor," wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy 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 instate producers."

Alcohol distributors and some anti-alcohol groups had banded together to uphold the bans, with the latter arguing that the laws prevented shipments of alcohol to underage youth. But smaller wineries argued that they cannot compete with large, mass-market brands unless they can reach customers directly. The case boiled down to state regulatory powers granted under the 21st Amendment -- which ended Prohibition -- versus the Constitution's ban on states passing laws that discriminate against out-of-state businesses.

A total of 24 states currently have direct-sales bans on their books. The Supreme Court suggested that those laws could be preserved as long as they were amended to prevent direct shipments from all wineries, instate or out-of-state.

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

SUBMIT A COMMENT:

Note: Comments are now held for moderator approval. More info

Name:
Comment: (limit 250 words)
Enter this word (help):	Change

GUIDELINES: 
Please keep comments on-topic, courteous, clean, non-commercial, and within the word limit.
Read the complete guidelines