Government decides governments’ rights more important than yours


The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has decided that NY State laws barring the sale and delivery of wine from out of state directly to consumers does not violate the Constitution.

Very dissapointing, they decided the 21st Amendment 

2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

Overrides any rights to free exchange and freedom of association, and essentially says a state can pass any law regarding alcohol and it’s OK, instead of how I read it, which is that states reserved the right to ban alcohol.  But what do I know.

Oh, yeah, they also said

“Alcohol sold by in-state retailers directly to consumers in New York has already passed through the first two tiers — producer and wholesaler — and been taxed and regulated accordingly,” he said.

Judge Calabresi issued a 17-page concurring opinion “to emphasize the unusual nature of judicial interpretation of the Twenty-first Amendment, a constitutional provision that, over 75 years, has been defined and redefined to accommodate changing social needs and norms.”

Which tells me this is more about preserving levels of regulation and taxation than it is about anything else.  So we go.


About Paul Stagg

Husband, lifter, MBA in Baltimore, MD. Will post about Powerlifting, politics, Classical Liberalism, Economics, building wealth, self improvement, productivity, heavy music, wine, food, beer, and almost anything else. View all posts by Paul Stagg

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: