Archive for October, 2005
Ohio House considers easing restrictions on wine shipping
October 26th, 2005
State Rep. Jon Husted, R-Kettering and other Ohio legislators are leaning towards a less restrictive shipping system.
I like this passage from Mark Fisher of Uncorked and the Dayton Daily News:
Earth to rabble-rousers: teen-agers looking to score alcohol are not going to get online, order a case of fine cabernet sauvignon from a boutique winery in California, wait a week for it to arrive on the doorstep, gamble that they�ll be the only one home when it does arrive, convince the delivery driver that they�re legal adults and can sign for the beverage, then call all their buddies, pull corks and start swirling, sniffing and sipping. The argument is bogus.
I agree with his argument here. States have many options when it comes to preventing wine from being shipped to minors. The easiest way is to require that the common carriers (FedEx, UPS) check the ID of the adult that receives the package at the time of delivery. Using this as an argument for prohibiting direct shipments is indeed “bogus”.
Oklahoma wine producers push for direct shipments
October 17th, 2005
A group of Oklahoma wine producers are pushing for a change in state law that will allow them to ship their product directly to consumers. Direct shipments are currently prohibited in Oklahoma, but this is one of at least 20 states that will likely revisit their direct shipping laws this year.
Group seeks to overturn Minnesota Internet sales ban
October 13th, 2005
A lawsuit by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public-interest group, seeks to overturn the ban on direct Internet sales in Minnesota. Currently, Minnesota allows direct to consumer sales for onsite orders as well as offsite orders that are taken via telephone, mail, or fax only.
Compromise in Michigan
October 10th, 2005
Michigan wineries and the Michigan Beer & Wine Wholesalers Association may be close to a compromise in the Senate that would allow limited direct shipping of wine by out of state wineries. The Michigan House passed HB 4959, which would “allow limited wine shipments by Michigan and out-of-state wineries to individual Michigan consumers but would ban wineries from shipping directly to retailers and restaurants”.
Granholm v. Heald
October 1st, 2005
On May 16th, 2005, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a landmark decision in the case of Granholm, Governor of Michigan, Et Al, v. Heald Et. Al.. We will discuss this case at length in this blog, but let’s start with the basics.
You can see the official Supreme Court decision here, but the key passage from Justice Kennedy’s opinion follows:
These consolidated cases present challenges to state laws regulating the sale of wine from out-of-state wineries to consumers in Michigan and New York. The details and mechanics of the two regulatory schemes differ, but the object and effect of the laws are the same: to allow in-state wineries to sell wine directly to consumers in that State but to prohibit out-of-state wineries from doing so, or, at the least, to make direct sales impractical from an economic standpoint. 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. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which invalidated the Michigan laws; and we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which upheld the New York laws.
Basically, because the states of New York and Michigan were allowing in-state wineries to ship directly to consumers while prohibiting out-of-state wineries from shipping directly to consumers in their state, the states were in violation of the Commerce Clause.
As a result, states must treat in-state and out-of-state wineries evenhandedly. This effectively means that states have two options - allow both in-state wineries and out-of-state wineries to ship directly to consumers in their state or prohibit direct shipments altogether.
Welcome
October 1st, 2005
Welcome to the Wine Direct Shipping Compliance weblog.
As you all know, the laws surrounding shipping wine directly to consumers are very complicated. On top of that, they change constantly. We created this blog to help you understand and stay on top of these “rules”. We encourage you to provide feedback and participate often.
