The wine shipping case -- and what happens
next
WineCAM note: The "Heald" behind the
Supreme Court
wine shipping case refers to Eleanor and Ray Heald, nationally known wine
journalists based in Troy, Michigan. This piece originally appeared Sunday,
May 22, 2005, on the Op-Ed pages of the suburban Detroit Observer &
Eccentric Newspapers, for which they write a weekly column.
WINE LOVERS GRATEFUL FOR
COURT DECISION,
BUT WHAT DOES THE STATE HOLD IN STORE?
By Eleanor and Ray Heald
By a 5-to-4 vote on Monday, May 16,
2005, the U. S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in Granholm v. Heald,
overturning as unconstitutional, Michigan's liquor laws that give
preferential treatment to Michigan wineries, allowing them to ship wine
direct to consumers and disallowing wineries in other states to do the
same. The highest court of our land found Michigan's laws discriminatory.
Regular readers of our Focus on Wine column, published in the
Thursday Taste section of the Observer & Eccentric newspapers, may
recall that we, 11 consumers and Domaine Alfred, a small California winery,
filed Heald v. Engler in March of 2000, a suit that we won in Sixth Circuit
Appellate Court.
Disliking that outcome, the State of Michigan with intervening defendants,
the Michigan Beer & Wine Wholesalers Association, petitioned the U.S.
Supreme Court to hear the case, which then acquired the name Granholm v.
Heald and was enjoined with a similar case from New York State. Oral
arguments in the case were presented December 7, 2004, before the Supreme
Court.
Although we are pleased with the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion, we are
alarmed, and you should be too, that Nida Samona, head of the Michigan
Liquor Control Commission (MLCC) has been reported in news media, including
the New York Times as stating she "would urge the state's Legislature
to prohibit all direct sales." Ms. Samona also said she viewed such a
measure as the best way to police sales to minors.
Since Ms. Samona heads only an enforcement agency, her remarks are troubling
in a number of ways. She does not make or change alcohol legislation in this
state. In her position, she is out of line in exercising opinions on
outcomes of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Granholm v. Heald.
Ms. Samona's remarks indicate that she did not read the Supreme Court
majority opinion written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy in which he wrote
"The state provides little evidence that the purchase of wine over the
Internet by minors is a problem. A recent study by the staff of the FTC
found that the 26 States currently allowing direct shipment report no
problems with minors' increased access to wine."
As head of the MLCC Ms. Samona should be aware that a Michigan winery has
never been cited for shipping wine to minors.
Let's assume that a majority of legislators and Governor Jennifer Granholm
hold Ms. Samona's opinion and seek to enact legislation that bans both
in-state and out-of-state wineries from shipping wine direct to consumers.
This would destroy Michigan's burgeoning wine industry, now 42 wineries
strong and lead to several more years of litigation at taxpayer's expense.
Instead, Michigan should look at increased direct wine sales as a source of
much-needed tax revenue.
In a time when Governor Granholm and the legislature have not discovered
ways to boost the state's economy through encouraging expanded business
growth, would they even consider destroying one that is agricultural-based
and along with it agritourism, gaining in popularity in the state? Do our
leaders in Lansing believe that putting the Michigan wine industry at a
disadvantage is the solution?
If you say "no way," or "Michigan would never stand for that," as an
editorial in the May 17, 2005 Detroit Free Press indicated, then you
misjudge the lobbying power of the Michigan Beer & Wine Wholesalers
Association, one of the most influential lobbying groups in Lansing.
Wholesalers form a $32 billion cartel that does not care if it destroys
Michigan wineries. In the past, wholesale middlemen have supported
legislation creating state-sanctioned wine distribution monopolies that
triggered our lawsuit and should arouse you to consumer outrage.
The U.S. Supreme Court has in its opinion indicated that states are part of
an economic union where discrimination is not tolerated. Even if you don't
drink wine, you need to care about the impending change in direct wine
shipping laws and CONTACT GOVERNOR GRANHOLM AND LEGISLATORS NOW to ensure a
free and open economy in this state -- one that promotes growth, not
stifles it. You can contact Governor Granholm at (517)373-3400, through
the
website at
http://www.michigan.gov/gov by
clicking on "Contact the Governor", and to Michigan legislators through the
Free the Grapes website at
http://www.freethegrapes.org by
clicking on "Contact Your State Legislators."
Copyright © 2005 Eleanor & Ray Heald; used by permission
Copyright © 2005 Wine Consumers Across
Michigan
Legally, we're
WineCAM LLC -- a Michigan Limited Liability Company
