STATES STRUGGLE TO DEFINE GRANHOLM
With the Costco appeals case approaching in March, let’s take a look at some of the direct wine shipping issues that are stirring the pot in other states.
GEORGIA. Georgia is inching closer to becoming a direct wine shipping state. Under a bill approved by the House Regulated Industries Committee earlier this week, consumers would be able to have up to 20 cases of wine a year shipped to them directly from farm wineries, which implies the bill would implement a production cap. But here’s the kicker. If passed, the law would require a one time face-to-face sell, and even then, limit the sell to smaller wineries. So if the bill does eventually pass into a law, we wouldn’t doubt it if James Tanford, a professor at Indiana University School of Law who has brought 21 suits on behalf of wineries, soon filed a suit as a representative of a larger, out-of-state winery.
[Ed. note: Tanford has said that in-person purchasing requirements discriminates against out-of-state wineries because a large majority of wine is grown on the West Coast, which makes it much for difficult for consumers to make a face-to-face purchase, and therefore put a barrier on trade.]
Fred Kitchens, executive director of the Wine & Spirits Wholesales of Georgia, was quoted in local papers as saying: "Everyone is in agreement on this. There is no opposition.”
The bill has yet to pass the state assembly. A similar proposal, along with legislation that would allow residents to vote on Sunday sales, is stalled in Georgia’s Senate Regulated Industries Committee.
MAINE. In Maine, a magistrate judge issued a decision in July to uphold the face-to-face requirement in Maine's law. Both sides await a district court judge's opinion. Sen. Lynn Bromley, sponsor of a bill that would allow wine to be shipped directly, has asked a house committee to hold off on consideration of her bill until another case pending at the U.S. District Court is heard.
To what case do they refer? Cherry Hill Vineyards, represented by James Tanford, challenges the Maine law that requires face-to-face sales, calling the law discriminatory against out-of-state wineries.
VIRGINIA. Meanwhile, a state bill to create a state government run nonprofit wine distributor within the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to serve Virginia farm wineries passed the state assembly this month. The bill is designed to help replace the wineries' loss of self-distribution rights after Granholm.
Under the new system, which will go into effect as soon as the governor signs the bills, the state-owned wholesaler will be allowed to distribute up to 3,000 cases of wine each year from each state winery.
ALASKA. Who knew there was wine in Alaska? Well there is, and they are currently waiting on the state senate to approve a bill that has already made it through the house. Currently, Alaska law says consumers must be on-premise of the winery to place any orders. The new proposed law, however, would allow licensed wineries to ship orders under 5 gallons of wine to any resident living in an area that allows mail-order wine.
So many different states and so many different interpretations of Granholm. It almost seems like an endless revolving door of lawsuits and appeals. It’s up to the Supreme Court to get involved in the Costco case once again and clear up questions concerning its ruling in 2005. Will wholesalers win their appeal, or will wineries get their way in direct shipping?
GEORGIA. Georgia is inching closer to becoming a direct wine shipping state. Under a bill approved by the House Regulated Industries Committee earlier this week, consumers would be able to have up to 20 cases of wine a year shipped to them directly from farm wineries, which implies the bill would implement a production cap. But here’s the kicker. If passed, the law would require a one time face-to-face sell, and even then, limit the sell to smaller wineries. So if the bill does eventually pass into a law, we wouldn’t doubt it if James Tanford, a professor at Indiana University School of Law who has brought 21 suits on behalf of wineries, soon filed a suit as a representative of a larger, out-of-state winery.
[Ed. note: Tanford has said that in-person purchasing requirements discriminates against out-of-state wineries because a large majority of wine is grown on the West Coast, which makes it much for difficult for consumers to make a face-to-face purchase, and therefore put a barrier on trade.]
Fred Kitchens, executive director of the Wine & Spirits Wholesales of Georgia, was quoted in local papers as saying: "Everyone is in agreement on this. There is no opposition.”
The bill has yet to pass the state assembly. A similar proposal, along with legislation that would allow residents to vote on Sunday sales, is stalled in Georgia’s Senate Regulated Industries Committee.
MAINE. In Maine, a magistrate judge issued a decision in July to uphold the face-to-face requirement in Maine's law. Both sides await a district court judge's opinion. Sen. Lynn Bromley, sponsor of a bill that would allow wine to be shipped directly, has asked a house committee to hold off on consideration of her bill until another case pending at the U.S. District Court is heard.
To what case do they refer? Cherry Hill Vineyards, represented by James Tanford, challenges the Maine law that requires face-to-face sales, calling the law discriminatory against out-of-state wineries.
VIRGINIA. Meanwhile, a state bill to create a state government run nonprofit wine distributor within the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to serve Virginia farm wineries passed the state assembly this month. The bill is designed to help replace the wineries' loss of self-distribution rights after Granholm.
Under the new system, which will go into effect as soon as the governor signs the bills, the state-owned wholesaler will be allowed to distribute up to 3,000 cases of wine each year from each state winery.
ALASKA. Who knew there was wine in Alaska? Well there is, and they are currently waiting on the state senate to approve a bill that has already made it through the house. Currently, Alaska law says consumers must be on-premise of the winery to place any orders. The new proposed law, however, would allow licensed wineries to ship orders under 5 gallons of wine to any resident living in an area that allows mail-order wine.
So many different states and so many different interpretations of Granholm. It almost seems like an endless revolving door of lawsuits and appeals. It’s up to the Supreme Court to get involved in the Costco case once again and clear up questions concerning its ruling in 2005. Will wholesalers win their appeal, or will wineries get their way in direct shipping?
posted at 12:49 PM
<< Home