Comments on: Direct wine shipments in MA now legal

By: :Larry Spivak

:Larry Spivak — Thu, 18 May 2006 18:10:08 +0000

I work at a small winery in California and was sent a copy of this BLOG as evidence we could ship into MA. NOT TRUE. UPS will NOT accept shipments and will probably confiscate any that try. The Wine Institute still lists MA as a “Do Not Ship” state. The US Supreme Court decision has had litle effect except to cause Florida and Texas to change their laws so we cannot ship there anymore and still be profitable. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news - this battle is far from over.

By: Jeni

Jeni — Sat, 17 Dec 2005 12:14:21 +0000

What’s the deal? don’t we export other goods and what if others stop buying goods from us? Come on! don’t be childish.

By: nonmevushalmarc

nonmevushalmarc — Tue, 17 May 2005 22:06:31 +0000

Howard is correct in his take on the two paths now available to states. I am not familiar with MA’s approach on this issue, but for those of us in NJ, this decision will likely make little impact in the near term (See the article in the Bergen Record). In fact, NJ passed its complete ban in response to a lawsuit, much like those that led this issue to the Court.

The picture is brighter for those living in NY, where Gov. Pataki has been receptive to the idea of opening up direct shipment for some time now. There is reason to be somewhat optimistic, even in states like NJ, because increased pressure may encourage legislators to rethink their approach. I completely agree with Jabbett that the protection of minors argument is so weak as to be essentially irrelevant. The states that have previously allowed direct shipping have not experienced a plague of underage drinking resulting from direct shipping. In his opinion for the Court, Justice Kennedy similarly dismissed this argument.

Those interested in reading my article, which, if nothing else, includes a fairly comprehensive history of the issue, should feel free to download the PDF.

By: Howard

Howard — Tue, 17 May 2005 20:56:48 +0000

Let’s not get too excited about this ruling yet. Marc can correct me if I’m wrong (since he wrote a law article about this), but my understanding is as follows:

The Supreme Court struck down state laws that discriminate against out of state win producers. States can then respond in one of two ways - both would be legal based on the court’s decision. The first approach is that states can remove the barriers to out of state wine mail orders. The other approach would be to prohibit ALL mail orders - both from in and out of state. It’s not clear to me which path Massachusetts (or New Jersey for that matter) will take. Let’s hope for option A.