Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Allows Direct Shipment of Wine
jrrl writes "For a while now, ordering wine (of the alcoholic variety, not the almost 0.9 variety) online has been a somewhat dicey proposition in some states. But today, the Supreme Court overturned state laws that disallowed direct shipment of wine from out of state. Their reasoning is that the states' 'authority to regulate the sale of alcohol within their borders' under the 21st Amendment does not supersede 'the Constitution's ban on state discrimination against interstate commerce.' States could still disallow all direct shipments, but at least they have to be evenhanded now."
yes it is, suckers!
fp!!!
Microsoft are going to be rather annoyed.
Anyone else glance at the title and think: What the hell would a state have to do with non-emulation?
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
This is an important decision. It will affect the lives of millions. Its obviously more important than things like..say..not letting completely unrelated 'riders' along on bills for something like..you know..helping our troops to survive in a battlefield environment.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
fp
w00t
The rationale for getting rid of this holdover from alcohol prohibition is the Commerce Clause and the discriminatory application of the laws. It is about time that the government allows me to make adult decisions for myself.
Michigan isn't satisfied and is proposing banning all over-the-net wine orders on the flimsy reasoning that kids will be able to buy booze without government control.
When you have a weak argument, tell them you are legislating "to save the children".
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
Actually, if you live in Maryland (or many of the other impacted states), this is a long overdue, worthy development. I'm just waiting for the state to cut its own nose off, and ban the shipment of wine including that of the (marginal) local wineries.
Never the less, I expect that those of us that build e-commerce web sites will have a few hundred brand new - if slightly tipsy - customers. With the patchwork shipping problem gone, many of the smaller operations will now consider it worth getting into the game. Thank you, Supreme Court, for doing the right thing on this. Cheers!
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I guess we can count on the courts to protect us from those M$-biased, patent hoarding, big business Congressmen trying to shut down the open source movement!
Ok, I bet I'm not the only one who misinterpreted the headline. But seriously, why is this on Slashdot, and why is it under YRO? Are the editors even trying?
But consider this: It is a big loss for "states rights", because it says that states have no right to control interstate commerce that passes through their borders.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
I am sure ze french are very 'appy about dis.
I'm not trying to troll here, I just don't see how this is nerdy, relevant, or important at all. Sure, this is good for interstate commerce, but the federal government has had a strong record of opening that up anyway. All I can see happening because of this is teen lushes in Pennsylvania getting wasted on Napa Valley wine without their parents knowing.
Please, if you're more insightful than me, explain what the "broader" issue is.
After all, I am strangely colored.
Is there a thriving business driving wooden barrells of wine over state borders in the USA? With the old trucks, and stetson hats and tommy guns?
Does the book keeper come along too?
OK, so my visualisation is a little close to the rediculous, but where I come from, nuclear weapons might get you in trouble.
But a bottle of 1986 Shiraz?
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
... free as in speech, or free as in beer?
I was so expecting to see an article about a Windows Emulator...I'm offically a hopeless nerd. Heh anyway...
My parents own a bar in Ohio. You know you'd be surprised the amount of laws there still are about these kind of things. I'm happy to see that these steps are being taken but really it makes one wonder about the state of interstate commerce.
Nobody gives a shit
That is plain wrong.
The constitution grants congress the power to regulate interstate commerce.
A law regulating internet sale of alcohol will originate in congress. They might give some of the regulatory rights to states. Then it would be legal.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Maybe its the snarkish nature of me, but minus the Internet part....doesnt this seem like a court case that should have been decided in the...oh say, 1800s?
i know, i hate adequacy and appropriateness trolls as much as the next
but seriously, this story is pretty far off the mark of slashdot's focus, no?
am i missing something?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Kennedy, Scalia, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer... what a majority.
John Paul Stevens and Clarence Thomas against!?! When was the last time they were on the same side of the fence?
Maybe this court isn't as political as some seem to believe.
1) It is a significant advance for common sense application of the Constitution. The states were clearly trying to help out whatever local businesses they had that would benefit from importation restrictions, and the Supremes saw through it. Hooray! 2) It is a blow to the idiocy of state-imposed taxes on Internet retail sales. The constitution is pretty clear that states don't get to post import duties on things brought in from other states. However, the states have been trying to squeak past this one for years. Maybe with this decision to lean on, it'll be another argument to prod the Supremes in future legal actions to reject a sales tax on cross-border transactions.
Dog is my co-pilot.
the constitution's "ban on state discrimination against interstate commerce.'" Interesting. Does that mean that gun control laws that ban interstate sale of firearms or requires exchange only by licensed dealers are also unconstitutional?
--
Vote for your hopes, not for your fears - Vote Third Party
Supreme Court Allows Direct Shipment of Wine
But I used to be able to just download it off the Internet! Hopefully now it won't get mixed up with all those AOL CDs that I get in the mail.
Canada is not a US state yet.
SB 877
Reading the text of the enacted bill:
Enrolled version
It looks like shipping direct to consumers from in-state wineries was also illegal, so perhaps the Supreme Court decision wouldn't have changed anything.
Why does this stuff matter to nerds?
Beep. Boop. Beep. You have questions. I have answers and your home address.
Living in Wisconsin (a state that currently bans the direct shipment of wine), this is a welcome thanks to underage drinking everywhere.
Now I can finally join the wine.com club and get my monthly bottles of wine without even using a front!
God bless the USA.
Thomas' dissent was about respecting the laws that congress had already established, the written letter of the constitution and the "protecting minors" angle that the states supposedly had. Beside the obvious fact that protecting minors was never a factor in this regulatory area, Thomas does indirectly invoke a good question. Where does too much freedom become a problem?
I happen to believe that morality means nothing when not imposed from within. Law and order can only accomplish so much and history has shown that the states that care about peace and that leave the matters of personal morality like sex and drug use to the church to deal with are the states that have the most peace. That's why some of us believe that the state's goal should be to maximize freedom to the highest extent without undermining law and order, even if many of the people don't want it.
For libertarians, this makes sense. Why not be able to have both unfettered school prayer AND legal drug use by adults? Isn't society better off when the individual is free and the government has a few defined tasks that it specializes on rather than becoming some monstrosity that has 50 bazillion departments that regulate everything from littering to education to the hair cut a toy poodle can have on sunday? Sometimes what the people want isn't moral or legal as it infringes on the rights of others without cause.
There was no good reason to keep people from being able to buy wine from other states directly. Part of the goal of the establishment of the federal government was to turn the states into a free trade zone. That's why the federal government has the exclusive authority to regulate interestate commerce. The "will of the people" had to bow to the law, and sometimes doing that actually makes the people freer than they may want to admit.
Part of the reason we have a constitution is that our founders did not believe that the will of the people often should be followed... and for good reason. It was the will of most whites for much of our history to keep blacks down. It was the will of most Germans to elect Hitler. Go down the line and you'll see that good men and women backed by good laws, not a democratic process, have carried the day for freedom and justice.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
If they're STATE laws. A federal law to that effect would stand, since the federal government is the one that gets to regulate interstate trade.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
This ruling might be good news for some folks in the long term, but in the short term at least it doesn't help folks in Maryland (and from what I can tell most other states). The existing state laws here don't contradict the USSC requirements.
Useful links:
Wine Institute pages on interstate wine shipping:
http://www.wineinstitute.org/shipwine/
US Wine shipping laws, state-by-state, from Wine Institute data
http://wi.shipcompliant.com/Home.aspx
Status of Maryland state laws is that individual wineries have to pay a $10 annual license fee, and that only allows them to ship wines that aren't otherwise available locally, and then they still have to use the three-tier system (so they have to ship to a distributor/wholesaler who then ships to a retailer near me).
That's a pretty painful process, and it's not obvious that it produces a useful result. (If the wine is sold anywhere in the state, then it's not eligible for this shipping method AFAICT, even if there's nowhere within an hour's drive that stocks the wine...)
Needless to say, it's more likely that I'd have such a wine shipped to a friend in a nearby state, or just find a store in DC/VA with a better selection where I can actually buy that wine. But that doesn't address things like "wine of the month" clubs which might be nice but which simply can't comply with Maryland restrictions.
This case settles a conflict between the interstate commerece clause and the 21st amendment Passed February 20, 1933.
Section 2.
The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
well that alows states to regulate the transport of booze in their borders, but many states NY in particular were using this to bolster local wineries at the expense of out of state whineries
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
I wonder if the bottles will come indivdually wrapped in a paper bag.
Hey, it's good enough for Mentats!
- Piter De VriesShow me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
Michigan isn't satisfied and is proposing banning all over-the-net wine orders on the flimsy reasoning that kids will be able to buy booze without government control.
When you have a weak argument, tell them you are legislating "to save the children".
LOL, this is a health issue. We don't want kids getting drunk and turning into alcoholics. Most banks and currency exchanges sell credit cards. All a kid needs to do is buy a credit card, they will sell them to anyone. Then they go on-line, and order wine. A few days later, they recieve a shipment at their front door. Find some house where the parents work late, and can collect the wine and go drinking.
I know some states have laws that require checking an ID when dropping off alcohol, but most post office employees are not bartenders, they don't care. They just drop the shit off.
The law that will eventually pass in congress will be this:
All alcohol sold on the internet, or shipped via postal services, must be sent registered mail, and can only be picked up at the post office, where the original Credit Card and State ID must be shown
That should be enough to combat kids who want to buy alcohol from the internet. But I can only imagine what a 95 degree warehouse will do to a red.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Baptists (non drinkers) have been a major force behind attempted legislation to force all alcohol to be sold from local retail outlets. They claim it is so underage kids can't order their own wine and drift into a life of sin. But who really thinks that a parent would not notice credit charge bills or large packages delivered to home.
The real reason is to keep other adult Baptists from secrectly drinking. Right now, most "wet Baptists" have to drive 100 miles to buy their hooch at liquor store where it is unlikely someone will recognize them. UPS delivery will make it much easier to be secrectly wet.
"If you go fishing with a Baptist, make sure there is at least 2 of them" (e.g. if there is only one then he will drink all of your beer).
(1) Nerds care about liberty, part of which includes freedom from unnecessary government fettering; and
:)
(2) Nerds drink.
[ home ]
When are the Supremes going to rule on Ashcroft v. Raich (the medical marijuana case) and MGM v. Grokster (if you don't know what it is, you don't deserve to live.) ? That's what we care about! (DISCLAIMER: I'm not of legal drinking age yet, so I shouldn't and won't profess an interest in this...it could well be overturned by the time I'm allowed to buy the wine legally...)
I hate the one hundred and twenty character limit for signatures with an all-enveloping, all-destroying, incredible pass
I do admit to figuring out how to get wine mailed to me back in high school however it was the 1980's and I always was an early adopter. So I do admit that there is the danger that some kid will get a hold of wine. Perhaps that kid will develop a taste for it and learn to drink slowly and appreciate the subtle nuances of the vintners art.
In all actuality though they'll make it into spritzers and use it trying to get into that neighbor girls panties.
I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
How many minors have you met that would be interested in buying wine? Beer, hard liqour and coolers yes, but wine?
This is great news for me seeing that was partly involved in the setting up of a online beer company whos main sales outlet is the internet and who have a Custom Label web app so you can create your own labels to put on the bottles .
.They also give you a share in the company for ordering the beer online and ship it via courier to your house only if you live in Australia of course.
,
The company is called Brewtopia and the beer is called Blowfly based in Sydney, Australia and they offer shares for signing up as member on the website and for refering friends
Recently they annouced they are preparing a IPO to list on the Australian Stock Exchange.
http://www.blowfly.com.au/ if you want to join up
Now I live in the US Blowfly Beer has been unavailble in the US partly due to the law of commerce across state lines
Great News for small wineries and microbrewers in the US and maybe even Australia .
I agree with this decision. It is not the state's business whether or not I get my wine from a liquor store or over the Internet. Despite their talk about sales to minors, the real concern of people who supported the bans on out of state direct shipments (and now all direct shipments) was/is the bottom line of wholesalers and liquor store owners.
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
Now my 16 yr old son can get booze with out me even knowing about it! WOOT! Go Go Supreme Court! Angry Parent
"Holy rusted metal, Batman!"
Come on people...this court decision belongs on slashdot...don't y'all see that Internet Wine Sales are gonna be the next big thing? Who do you think are gonna be on all of the pop-ups!
I happen to believe that morality means nothing when not imposed from within.
OK. Agreed.
Why not be able to have both unfettered school prayer AND legal drug use by adults?
We have legal school prayer. The only issue is whether an authority acting in government capacity can lead it or not. But of course, that's not "morality being imposed". That's only the government telling you how to pray. Completely different.
Isn't society better off when the individual is free and the government has a few defined tasks that it specializes on rather than becoming some monstrosity that has 50 bazillion departments that regulate everything from littering to education to the hair cut a toy poodle can have on sunday?
Where's the poodle part? Not aware of that. The government has evolved to be big. How would you know how large it should be? Oh that's right, you're making practical decisions based on idealogical principles! How silly of me! We don't need any evidence that it could work in a modern society! Count me in!
It was the will of most whites for much of our history to keep blacks down.
For the first ones, it really depends on how you define "most". In 1861 (over 100 years ago, thus further than over half our history ago), a man was elected president from a new party founded on the basis of abolishing slavery. He recieved most of the popular vote. Most of the founding fathers were against slavery in principle, but saw no way out of it (many freed their slaves after their death).
It was the will of most Germans to elect Hitler.
Hitler never got the majority of the popular vote so I fail to see how that's most. His high was somewhere around 1/3. In fact, if the laws written in the Weimar constitution were actually followed, Hitler would've never had vast sweeping powers. But Hitler decided he didn't need a big government making laws and abolished the government by fiat He could do it himself! I guess you and he do have something in common!
(As a caveat, disolving the representitive body in England caused a civil war a few hundred years ago. The Germans had no such response in the 1930's, so maybe I'll give you popular acquiescence, but no doubt caused by popular fear).
Seriously, I enjoy your principles, but where you go with it and how you derive it are simply ranting. If I want sensationalism, I'll watch Jerry Springer.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Youth should be taught safe drinking. They should learn to know their limits, and what alcohol can do to them.
After all, they're going to drink, so let's make sure they do it properly.
It's time for a drinker's license, just as there are driver's licenses and hunting licenses. You should have to pass a test (with both written and practical components), or you shouldn't get to drink.
In the absence of a drinker's license, kids will learn their drinking skills from peers and young adults, often those with the worst drinking skills. Bartenders, while often highly trained professionals, seldom have the time to instruct young novice drinkers on the finer points such as:
Until we properly attend to the needs of our youth, we won't be sure of the kind of society we'll become. The future of drinking, and our civilization built on its mighty foundation, is too important to be left to random chance.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
You can just download it. Why make a big deal about shipping it?
Some people feel good about having a high-quality stamped CD, a printed manual, and a support contract.
Others just want to get a buzz :-)
The really interesting story here is that Juanita Swedenburg, a winemaker in Middleburg, Virginia, is the old lady who was irritated enough to challenge the law, and won. Middle class, they built their winery saving a bureaucrat's salary plus hardship pay. Nothing fancy. Proves there's still some room for common sense in the republic...
Then came Prohibition, and when that (thankfully and inevitably) failed we got the 21st Amendment.
The repeal of Prohibition lasted only four years. After the 21st Amendment legalized alcohol, the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 in effect banned pot nationwide.
If you're not old enough to buy wine in a store, you can have it shipped to you?
That's kinda neat.
yeah it would completly "paralyze" the legislative process to seperate such things as a national ID system and an Iraq war spending measure.
Doesn't WINE come with every Linux distro that's available in the world? I guess we need the Supreme Court (USA) to keep Microsoft from interfering with WINE. You would think with a few gazillion USDs in the bank that they could get their own booze.
who cares about wine what about the new PS3 stats...
When I was investigating a start-up, I began to read about all the different liquor laws across the country. Quite frankly, its insane. Here in Texas, certain beverage sizes are restricted to an uncommon size and wholesalers control the entire market. Alcohol producers cannot send product directly to stores it MUST BY LAW go through a distributor then sent on to your local store. Literally there are warehouses where all they do is unload the truck and reload another right there. Thank the Texas legislature and a whole lot of campaign contributions for that one.
s /news.html
If your really interested in learning more about the situation and how crazy it gets you can read this great article from the Houston Press (Houston's Counter Culture Weekly Magazine) here
http://www.houstonpress.com/issues/2005-04-07/new
I think if you cut through all posturing what it comes down to is more about taxation than regulation. There's been uneven success at taxing the internet so there's going to be resistence to giving any part of a lucritive source of revenue.
The whole "activist" tag is just stupid. Any judge, faced with what they honestly consider to be drift from what the bulk of what law should be, is going to be "activist", because they are act upon their own legal theories. This applies to all political angles. (Think of the cases where judges have recused or resigned over what they thought was unjust law. That's an extreme version.)
Scalia is sometimes an "activist". So is the 9th CC. (And it is funny that the 9th handed him a massive lit grenade with Raich, and will be interesting to see what he does with it). But you can't fault him for consistency. I personally believe he is wrong a lot, but he is consistent. Most SCOTUS watchers (especially those who watch with an agenda, instead of professional interest or merely as a spectator sport) miss his nuance.
I personally think he and Kennedy are the most interesting members. (Again, not endorsing either of them; they're just, in my view, the most interesting.)
I forget what 8 was for.
Michigan's Governor Granholm has a bill awaiting her signature that would allow motorists to transport an opened but recorked bottle of wine from the restaurant where it was purchased and partially consumed to the buyer's home. This is kind of a no brainer -- "hmmm, I just paid $120 for this bottle, and we only had one glass. Chug the rest and drive home sloshed, or leave it on the table for the bus boy to drink?" (It's currnetly illegal to have an open container (even a re-sealed open container) in the passenger compartment of a motor vehicle, at least here in Michigan).
I am not left-handed, either!
And farewell Bandit. Don't these people know what their inconsiderate law-making is doing to the memories of cultural icons?
Nihil Illegitemi Carborvndvm
does this work with all alcoholic beverages, or only wines ? I do not see how it wouldn't work with all of them... so this must mean I can order some everclear now, maybe. maybe not :(
...unless you want to get wet.
Is it also legal to ship korans over state lines?
I'd like to keep a stack next to my toilet for when the turd is too big for the pipe.
My first thought was, Aha! Supreme Court... Wine... favorable... and for a tiny fraction of a second, I was trying to find out if they had said something bad or good about alternative Windows APIs.
Of course, this all happened real fast. I'm happy with this one too, because it gives the "more freedom" result.
I was wondering why Amazon.com bought Wine.com two weeks ago. Looks like that investmet will pay off nicely now.
From your subject, I was afraid you would try to argue that the US is a democracy.
Admittedly, this case had problems, regardless of the philosophies involved. I for one am glad that the Supreme Court decided to interpret the boundary between in-state and out-of-state commerce as it was intended by both the original Constitution and the 21st Amendment, by separating the concept of "delivery" from that of "sale".
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Yeah, it's a "diet" thing
The Raven
Now it would also be very nice if this or similar decision was extended to cars. For now many states require local dealer to sell you car -- you can't just go online and order it from, say, Vermont. In order for online car seller to be able to serve customers in, say, Texas, they have to have local affiliated dealership. While perhaps "back then" it was a useful law, and a part of attempt to separate out dealerships and car manufacturers, so to avoid price gouging, these days it's simply protecting local tax revenue.
Hyperom.com
Here in Ohio I believe you can get carded to buy spray paint. I'm pretty sure they cut off spray paint sales for minors to reduce vandalism. Don't know for sure - I was already past 18 when it was in the works.
Why, oh why, didn't I take the Blue Pill?
"Prepaid credit card" is a contradiction right there in the name. By "credit" you want to be able to buy something now and pay for it later, but "pre-paid" obviously means you already paid for it beforehand. The right term would be "cash card", or "debit card" for the ones that are tied up to your bank account.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"Their reasoning is that the states' 'authority to regulate the sale of alcohol within their borders' under the 21st Amendment does not supersede 'the Constitution's ban on state discrimination against interstate commerce.' "
Therefore, I can order, online, legally, according to this ruling:
Prostitutes (though I'm not sure how she'd fit in a box, but I digress) Narcotics, explosives (fireworks for the 4th of July) and anything else for that matter because states cannot supersede interstate commerce! How about that!
I get all my wine shipped by Nicks Wines - http://www.nicks.com.au/ - The best site I have found for Aussie wines. They seem to ship internationaly too. I wonder if international trade agreements trump US State law? Can anyone point me in the direction of a similar US site? I wouldn't mind a couple of cases of some of that Napa valley plonk.
Actually, the wineries mostly would like to be able to ship to consumers in other states.
It's the distributors that have both the wineries and the consumers by the short hairs. They slosh buckets of money around every state legislature to stamp out direct sales. This is a huge defeat for them.
Too much Law; not enough Order.
There are certain things that really should have more uniform laws nationally. There can always be problems when the laws are so wildly different in different places. It makes business difficult at times and could have a negative impact on the economy because of the costs associated with having to know what laws in what states affect your business where it maybe legal where you operate from.
Maryland? Or, Montgomery County? Last I heard there were only two states and Montgomery County, Maryland that had an absolute monopoly on alcohol sales. Since states trump counties and the Constitution trumps the states maybe I can now start getting good wines instead of the drech that the county warehouse distributes. Even better would be that the county finally figures out that it's fighting a loseing battle and they'll finally let Trader Joes start ordering outside the county channel and sell wine in their stores here like they do everywhere else. It just seems so, weird, that TJs is dry.
You're not from New England, are you? I remember back to the no so distant past when:
1) I couldn't buy booze in a package store in MA on Sunday (except for Sundays between Thanksgiving and New Years, I know, nuts). (changed in 2004 or 2003)
2) Retail Stores didn't open until noon on Sundays. (changed in 1994)
3) A company or person can own no more than 5 retail liquor licenses. This is why the Trader Joe's in Cambridge can sell wine/beer while the one in Swampscott cannot. I've heard that there are 5 Star Markets in MA that sell beer/wine...
4) Can't drink beer an bowl.
5) Can't buy a pitcher of beer just for myself. (Stupid Happy Hour regulation!)
That's all for now...
Local newspaper had an article about the descision, and the fact that it's not going to change much at this time.
I live in PA, and I'm not going to be able to order wine online anytime soon. The State Store is going to retain the monopoly as the sole distributor in-state.
Dephine URL
The problem is that some groups are so big that legislators can get away with adding additional "benefits" to the bill because the people who might actually care that the particular legislator's pet project is a total waste of money don't live in that legislator's district, and nobody is dumb enough to vote against a bill backed by a lobby as powerful as the agricultural lobby.
Same reason we got the national ID cards - somebody stuck it on the defense appropriations bill, and after the beating Kerry took because he voted against a defense appropriations bill (nevermind that the bill was crap), ain't nobody going to vote against one of those things if they have ANY thoughts whatsoever of running for office again.
Democracy at it's finest: Prevent people from voting against stupid stuff by forcing them to vote against money for the troops at the same time.
paintball
Some of you might scoff because you have never tried it and it is virtually unheard of in the US. But Canadian wineries are producing some very good wines since they riped out all of the native grapes in the late 70's and early 80's and replanted them with traditional french varieties.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
It was IJ's lawers who made it possible to take this case to the SCOTUS and to win the case.
h tml
http://ij.org/economic_liberty/ny_wine/5_16_05pr.
Why do Americans:
a) have strange laws about what they should drink?
b) make the whole subject into a complex philosophic and political discussion topic?
c) think that anyone else in the world cares two hoots about the strange repressions which make US society one of the most hypocritical and self-centred on earth?
"but I don't think they've gone that far."
Such touching innocence.
If you think that the alcohol industry is any more caring of its drug users than the cocaine industry or the opium industry, you have been watching too many beer commercials.
Does this apply to beer as well?
I have often regretted my speech, never my silence.
-Xenocrates
Wrong. The ruling still allows states to prohibit direct to consumer wine sales (or direct sales of alcohol above FOO proof, or even go outright dry); the catch is, if they do so, it has to apply equally to both in-state and out-of-state wineries. The NY Law, for example, banned direct ship sales from out-of-state wineries, but allowed direct ship sales from NY wineries.
It's only a loss for state's rights in that they can't apply protectionist legislation to prop up domestic vinyards (or breweries). However that "right" was already supposed to have been lost around 1789, when the constitution (and the commerce clause) was ratified in the first place.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
- 6 states (North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, West Virginia, Alabama, and Arkansas) restrict alcohol by volume (ABV) for beer to 6%. This basically ensures that no craft breweries can survive in these states.
- Alabama limits the size of beer containers to 16 oz. No growlers for you in 'Bama
- An individual can possess no more than a case (30 cans/bottles) of beer in Arkansas
- Do we even need to mention the insane alcohol laws in Utah?
Dry counties are still abound
More cool laws: http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol-info/FunFacts/ItsT heLaw.html
I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advise. Put down the bottle and see an attorney in your jurisdiction (preferably one who has also put down the bottle).
.
The repeal of prohibition is actually a grant of federal power to the states (and there are a couple more, such as the appointment of electors, notwithstanding what you were told in high school civics).
States have carte blanche to regulate alcohol, even if such regulations would normally violate other provisions of the Constitution. Prior to this decision, the only regulation that I can recall ever being struck down was the use of different drinking ages by gender (lower for women).
The states that banned out of state shipments, however, weren't regulating alcohol. They were granting favorable treatment to in-state wineries. Please note that the regulations were not of the "no wine shipments" variety but rather "no wine shipments from out of state wineries, but in-state wineries can."
Nothing in this ruling stops states from banning all wine deliveries--they just have to have the same rules for other states as their own.
Aside from such cases, states can make their alcohol laws as moronic as they want--witness Ohio, Pennslyvania, and Utah . .
hawk, esq.
Aren't most French wine grapes these days descended from California stock? Something about a couple of nasty plagues that wiped out most European grape stocks in the 19th century...
Or is this just an urban myth?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Yes Phyloxra (sp?) did wipe out a lot of European grape varieties and I believe that the solution was to graft the grapes onto North American root stock that was resistent. The actual grape varieties (Cab. Sauv., Metlot, Syrah, ..) are all of European origin however. The native grapes that I refered to that the Canadian wineries purged were things like Concord and Niagara. Some of the local native/french hybirds do such as Baco Noir are still grown and are very good.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Now that it's legal to order wine from other states online, I'm sure some of you must have recommendations of good wineries. I'll start by tossing out one from Napa Valley, V. Sattui:
http://www.vsattui.com/
I find their reds, particularly their Cabernets and Zinfandels (no, not White Zinfandel, regular plain old Zinfandel), to be quite nice. Not a big fan of their whites, though. I'd love to find an exceedingly dry, oaky Chardonnay, so let's hear some suggestions!
On stereophonic equipment, the monaural sound obtained through multiple channels will enhance your listening pleasure.
You say this like it would be a BAD thing????
For the most part...slow moving government is a good thing!!
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Kids need to know to avoid playing pitcher quarters until they build up a good tolerance.
Texas has the most dumbass laws about alcoholic beverages I have had the displeasure of suffering with.
Look at some of the stupid stupid stupid things they do with beers and ales. Defining a beer type by it's alcohol content is crap! A lager is a lager because it's LAGERED, not because it has an ABV of X. Ales are ALES because of the way that they're fermented...
The stupidity of definitions around beers is the same for wines.
Next, we need to take away the ability of a county to ban alcohol sales. Dry counties are crap, and it shouldn't be legal for municipalitie, counties or states to do such a thing.
Isn't it the case that shippers in the United States (FedEx, UPS, etc) already have policies in place for requiring an adult signature? I'm pretty sure that they've done that for years for things like beer-of-the-month-club microbrewery shipments.
Additionally you run into the Texas problem here. Texas has this law. As a result people often kill bills on purpose by using useless riders.
Try E-Guittard. Scharffen Berger isn't bad either. A step down from both of those is Ghirardelli
"Would you rather have a playstation addicted dork wearing a star wars t-shirt?"
A long step down. But not as far down as Hershey.
And the brethren went away edified.
I looked at this article and thought - that's interesting, I like drinking wine.
I should have the right to choose my wine from any state I desire it. I can't get Missouri wine as far away as Arkansas. I cross a state line and I can't get it. I can get Arkansas wine all-day-long, but wine one state up is off limits. "Why don't you go to a liquoer store?", you might ask. I did. The distributors don't offer ANY wines from Missouri in Arkansas. It's a freedom of choice issue which is just one more example to show that only lobbyists can get laws changed. Even this change is not for the consumer; it's for the fairness of the businesses.
Do you really believe that anyone is worried about teens using this to buy wine? I have a teen and trust me, she finds alcohal if she wants it. The law states that she has to go to school. Guess how effective that was at getting or keeping her there.
If Nerds don't drink wine, then I agree with you, the article doesn't belong here. I do drink wine and am glad it was here or I would have missed it.
Ops, I shuld have usd the prevuwe but in.
I'm 22, but if I shave, I can pass for 17, easy. I went into a hardware store after shaving the day previous, and I got carded for some spray primer I needed for my wargames figures....
I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
I never said overbrewed. I do know the difference, especially since the process (toasting the leaves and the temperature that the leaves are steeped at) is very similar for tea. You can have your stroke now.
I happen to like my coffees roasted on the dark side myself. It is as much a matter of personal taste as anything else. In Europe and the Mediterranean basin you find coffee roasted anywhere from very light (just enough so that it isn't green coffee anymore) to very dark (nearly charcoal). I will agree that Starbucks tends toward the dark end of that spectrum but their coffee wouldn't be unusally dark for say Naples.
I've had lightly roasted fine coffee and still prefer the dark stuff myself. Now I will say that I try to avoid Starbucks whenever possible but their coffee is drinkable (at least their beans, drip, and straight espresso are I don't do the sweetend crap for people who don't like coffee)
Kiona 2002. I currently have 8 bottles left of the two cases I purchased at the beginning of last year. I'd currently sell them for far higher than what Inniskillin or Jackson-Triggs best ice wines are going for.
Ah Kiona, I'm familar with them they do some very nice non-ice wines as well.
I think I know how they get away with selling it so cheap. The growing conditions in much of Eastern Washington are nearly ideal for a number of grape varieties and the conditions are pretty consistent from year to year which means that nearly every year is a good year with little chance of crop failure (at least compared to Napa or Bordeaux). In addition the conditions for the formation of ice wine occur at nearly the ideal time every year in some vinyards. I believe this is especially true of Kiona's vinyards. Therefore they can put a certain amount of their crop into ice wine production with little risk.
Their 2003 wasn't as good in my opinion. Too much acid on the palate. Some wineries sell at higher price points because they can. Some wineries sell at lower price points because they feel like it and it is a good business strategy as well. I would sooner buy a case of really good $20 ice wine than I would three bottles of a $80 good ice wine. In fact, I bought two cases. Which winery made the higher profit off of me?
For whatever reason most Washington wineries tend to favor low price points for the quality and doing relatively high volume (not as high as E&J but up there with the higher volume quality Napa or Sonoma producers). There are very few of the sort of botique wineries in Washington doing super small case volumes like you see in California.
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
It's a site that has over 1800 wineries listed (with more added daily) that helps you search by region and states to name a few.
Find out more about wineries in your area so you can plan a visit or purchase thier wine online!!
Thanks for reading this shameless promotion of my site!!!