Still Ignoring the Supreme Court Four Years Later

Looking for answers four years after the the Tennessee Wine decision

Four years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court further diminished the power of states to regulate alcohol via discrimination. Tennessee Wine v Thomas reaffirmed the holding in the 2005 Granholm v Heald decision and expanded that holding to apply to other entities beyond producers—and to retailers in particular. In fact, the only conceivable reason the Supreme Court decided to hear Tennessee Wine v Thomas was to correct the building misconception that Granholm’s non-discrimination principles only applied to laws governing producers of alcohol.

The Granholm v Heald decision held that the 21st Amendment giving power to the states to regulate alcohol did not give those states the power to pass laws that had the predominant effect of discriminating against out-of-state economic interests, rather than the predominant effect of advancing the health and safety of a state’s residents.