Quantcast

A Toast to the Supreme Court!

Laren Spirer and Tamara Lover toasting the good newsGothamist joins oenophiles around the country in lifting a glass to celebrate the Supreme Court's ruling yesterday that sets the stage to allow winemakers on Long Island and elsewhere to ship across state lines directly to out-of-state consumers. The New York Times describes the decision and the restrictive laws that were impacted:

By a 5-to-4 vote, the court overturned state liquor laws in New York and Michigan that gave preferential treatment to in-state wineries. Both states permit in-state wineries to ship directly to consumers, bypassing both retailers and wholesalers.

Michigan prohibited direct shipment by out-of-state wineries while New York nominally permitted it for out-of-state wineries that maintain a New York office, a requirement that no out-of-state winery has met and that the majority on Monday found so financially burdensome for small wineries as to amount to a prohibition.

Gothamist looks forward to the opening of the floodgates, as we are not fond of moderation or restriction, especially when it comes to our wine. Cheers!

Read Gothamist's past wine coverage, by Tamara Lover (pictured above right with Laren Spirer).

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • j.

    Viva la dormant commerce clause

  • As the article briefly notes, however, the SC's decision leaves states the option of barring all direct-to-consumer shipping of wine regardless of whether it's from in-state or out-of-state wineries. This will likely be an attractive regulatory option for states with non-existent or negligible wine-producing capacity, e.g. Utah.

  • Kojak

    This means nothing unless it also applies to all other alcoholic beverages.

    Plus whats the deal with the big ass wine glasses and the tiny amount of wine in each glass? What gives?

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@gothamist.com