Let my Picpoul go
Judge Rya W. Zobel has freed the grapes - in Massachusetts at least. On Wednesday, the U.S. District Court judge ruled that a state law allowing wineries to engage in direct shipment of wine to Massachusetts residents only if said wineries produce less than 30,000 gallons per year or sold fruit wine, rather than grape wine, is unconstitutional.
The decision is a blow to wholesalers in the state, who since the repeal of Prohibition have enjoyed acting as government-mandated middleman in all transactions involving the sale of alcoholic beverages. The ruling will either give Massachusetts' consumers free access to any winery willing to ship directly to them, or drive legislators determined to preserve the interests of wholesalers back to the statutory drawing board.
The decision makes interesting reading, at one point describing the current wine distribution system as hourglass-shaped, with a large number of producers comprising the top, a large number of consumers comprising the bottom and a small number of wholesalers making up the constricted passage between the two. The effect of this situation, the ruling says, has been to give wholesalers “greater bargaining power with both wineries and retailers in states [like Massachusetts] where it is mandatory to have a wholesaler.”
The law overturned by the decision was passed in 2006 over the veto of Governor Mitt Romney. State senator Michael Morrissey is described in the judge’s ruling as the driving force behind the measure. The Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of Massachusetts -- a five member trade group whose businesses are together responsible for around 75% of all wine sold in the Commonwealth -- helped draft it.
There were no questions of material fact at issue in the case. The decision was based on a point of law. Does the Massachusetts statute violate the so-called Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. constitution by disadvantaging out-of-state wineries in favor of in-state wineries?
The 30,000 gallon limit imposed by the law disqualified 98% of all U.S. wine from direct shipment to Massachusetts consumers, while making 100% of Massachusetts-made wine (no winery in the state produces as much as 30,000 gallons per year) eligible for direct shipment.
Concluding that the situation clearly conferred “disproportionate benefits on both Massachusetts wineries and wholesalers" Judge Zobel found the statute discriminatory and struck it down.
We don’t expect that this is over.
Comment
Permalink
E-mail
You watch those greedy [people] will appeal the decision or put some other restriction that will again have to be ruled unconstitutional 2 years later. You know a bunch of state legislators' campaigns are funded by the deep pockets of the liquor wholesalers. They may not (maybe they are) be taking money filled envelopes like Turner or Wilkerson but it is still tantamount to corruption.....taking money for a vote that is anti-consumer and anti-citizen. Gov. Patrick, it is time to clean up this state. You can work on this after you clean up the Partners monopoly debacle.....
Boston Globe-I have been begging you to do a more in-depth story on this and determine which politicians receive campaign money from the liquor wholesalers. It is just like the liquor licensing board; where so few control so much, corruption is bound to follow. It is your duty to expose corruption by special interests.
Pete P,
The Globe has not even done an in-depth report on this ruling, never mind the implications. It is a sad day when I have to go to the Herald to find a news story because the Globe doesn't want to ruffle the feathers of politicians before they have a response.
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.