Jon, I wish that I could agree with you here, but I don't expect it to have any effect in MA. I'm sure that MA does not (or they will pass a “Consumer Protection” Reg/Law to prohibit it if they have to) allow mail-order sales from in-state wineries to Residents. That's the hook on this ruling . . . treating in-state and out-of-state wineries the same.
I bolded the text that I believe makes this issue irrelevant in MA. MA doesn't allow in-state mail order guns/ammo/alcohol. Thus, they are already treating out-of-state sources the same as they treat in-state sources! Therefore, no discrimination could be proved (except against the citizens, and they don't count!).
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2005/05/16/court_oks_direct_interstate_wine_sales?mode=PF
Top court allows direct interstate wine sales
By James Vicini | May 16, 2005
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - States cannot ban direct out-of-state wine shipments if they allow their wineries to sell directly to consumers, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday in a decision that could lead to lower prices and more easily available choices.
By a 5-4 vote, the high court ruled that the bans involving out-of-state wineries unconstitutionally discriminated against interstate commerce. Such laws have been adopted in 23 states while the other 27 states allow direct wine sales, industry officials said.
Defenders of the laws argued that states under the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition in 1933, have the power to regulate the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages.
The laws generally banned direct shipments from out-of-state wineries through sales on the Internet or on the telephone, but allowed direct sales to consumers by wineries within the state.
Justice Anthony Kennedy said for the court majority that the laws at issue from Michigan and New York were designed to grant in-state wineries a competitive advantage over wineries located in other states.
"We hold that the laws in both states discriminate against interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause (of the U.S. Constitution) and that the discrimination is neither authorized nor permitted by the 21st Amendment," Kennedy concluded.
Kennedy rejected the arguments by the states seeking to justify the bans as necessary to protect minors from alcohol and to be able to collect taxes on the sales.
In states with the ban, out-of-state wineries may sell only to wholesalers, who distribute to retailers, who in turn sell to consumers. A U.S. Federal Trade Commission report has found the bans reduce consumer choice and increase wine prices.
The two cases have been closely watched by the wine industry, which has annual U.S. sales of more than $21.6 billion.
There are more than 3,700 wineries across the country, according to the industry trade association. Most of them outside the top 25 are small, family-run enterprises.
The Supreme Court agreed to review the cases from Michigan and New York in an effort to resolve conflicting U.S. appeals court rulings on the constitutionality of the laws.
Michigan officials said Congress delegated to the states the right to regulate the shipment and transportation of alcoholic beverages within its borders.
Opponents of the Michigan law, wine connoisseurs, wine journalists and a small California winery, described the ban as protectionist, discriminatory and anti-consumer.
Those challenging the New York law included two small family-run wineries in Virginia and California and three New York wine drinkers.
Joining Kennedy in the majority opinion were Justices Antonin Scalia, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor and Clarence Thomas dissented.
Thomas wrote that the court majority suggested it believed the decision would enhance consumer welfare and serve the nation well. He said the 21st Amendment and a 1913 federal law "took those policy choices away from judges and returned them to the states."
© Copyright <http://www.boston.com/help/bostoncom_info/copyright> 2005 The New York Times Company
