Gourmets of Wine > Wine Makes Strange Benchfellows

[A Fool in the Forest] I have to agree with the Professor's analysis of the limited basis for the majority's decision: essentially, what the Court disallows is the discrimination between in-state and out-of-state wineries under the direct shipping laws under consideration.  One "remedy" available to the affected jurisdictions is to treat the two classes of winemakers similarly by prohibiting all direct shipment of wine, without regard to whether the point of origin is inside or outside of the State's borders.  I suspect there would be a unanimous vote of the Court for the proposition that the 21st Amendment authorizes that sort of regulation -- just as it would authorize a State to go completely "dry" if it so chose.  We should learn soon in which of these States there is a sufficiently strong neo-Prohibitionist sentiment -- or a sufficiently strong lobby for the entrenched wholesaler/distributor interests -- to close the door that the Court opened this morning.

Previous [Previous] Review of Proyecto 4 Wine From Spain...

Next [Next] "Bottled Poetry"...

Some slightly related from Technorati and Google.

[My Likes and Dislikes] The Supreme Court ruling forcing states to allow d...: The Supreme Court ruling forcing states to allow direct sales from out-of-state wineries is expected to help lots of NY State wineries, particularly the ones in the Finger Lakes. Basically, the court said you couldn't prohibit outsiders from selling into your state if you allowed your wineries to ship outside the state. But you can prohbit both. Either way, you just have to be fair.

[Ben Muse] Regulating behavior: People aren't like rocks - regulators can't just put them in one box or another and expect that they will stay put. They have imagination and initiative, they move ont their own, and the react against regulatory constraint: Human Creativity and Interstate Wine Shipment

[Abstractappeal.com] Abstract Appeal -- by Matt Conigliaro: With these things in mind, I have a simple suggestion: the Florida court system should consider creating a centralized Internet site where certain case materials from courts at any level will be available once a case generates a high level of mass public interest. Very few cases would meet such a standard, and someone would have to be given discretion to decide which ones do. Once a case is chosen, publicly available materials on the case from any Florida court could be selected, again with discretion, for easily accessed and well organized placement on this single Internet site. The people of Florida, and from elsewhere, could view these materials and see that the state judiciary as a whole has handled the matter with care, attention, and competence.

http://www.chipbennett.net [Chipbennett.net] blog.chipbennett.net: The book is very well-written, informative, and makes for enjoyable reading, but it has one short-coming: the vast majority of the book concerns the outlets of this Conservative revolution, rather than the people driving that revolution. The phenomenon of the revolution itself has been well-documented, from the City Journal article “We’re Not Losing The Culture Wars Anymore” from which South Park Conservatives was born, to Hugh Hewitt’s Blog, which covers most of the same information, but with a focus on how savvy blog-entrepreneurs should take advantage of the phenomenon. South Park Conservatives could have filled an interesting niche had it focused more on its namesake and less on their means of expression.

http://www.chipbennett.net [Chipbennett.net] blog.chipbennett.net: In a long overdue ruling that split Justices Antonin Scalia (who sided with Breyer, Ginsburg and Stevens) and Clarence Thomas, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down state laws forbidding direct shipments of wine from out-of-state. While proponents of such laws used the prevention of underage drinking as their pretext, the Court saw through this facade and acknowledged that the true purpose was simply to protect both in-state wine producers and wine distributors’ profits.Great news for my parents, who live in the People’s Republic of Maryland, which, not surprisingly, has some of the most restrictive laws on out-of-state wine shipments. I, on the other hand, live in Missouri, which is already a reciprocity state.

[Outsidethewhale.blogspot.com] Outside the Whale: Wine and Interstate Commerce: Does the Good ...: That was definitely not the view of the generations that made policy in 1919 when the Eighteenth Amendment was ratified or in 1933 when it was repealed by the Twenty First Amendment. On the contrary, the moral condemnation of use of alcohol as a beverage represented not merely the convictions of our religious leaders, but the views of sufficiently large majority of the population to warrant the rare exercise of the power to amend the Constitution on two occasion. Again, the purpose here is clearly to provide some context as to the social, political and historical forces that lead to the important constitutional changes during this period that ought to bear on how the Court treats the issue of interstate regulation of alcohol in a modern context. The same goes for the "deference" Justice Stevens advocates for the opinion of Justice Brandeis.

Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, ,