New York wine buffs will be able to order their favorite libations dropped directly at their doorstep from wineries across America, under a new federal court ruling.
A Manhattan judge found yesterday that a law banning out-of-state wineries from directly shipping bottles to New York is unconstitutional.
Judge Richard Berman said that the New York law “constitutes a cut and dry example of direct discrimination against interstate commerce.”
If the ruling withstands any potential appeals, New Yorkers would be able to avoid paying the high wholesalers’ fees presently charged on wine orders from popular wine-growing regions such as California.
The ruling was made in a case brought by Virginia boutique winery Swedenburg Estate Vineyards, producers of about 2,500 cases of wine annually.
Berman found the state law discriminatory since New York allows in-state wineries to ship directly to New York drinkers.
“That the New York direct shipping ban on out-of-state wine burdens interstate commerce and is discriminatory on its face is clear,” he said.
Wholesalers in New York have argued the law is required to regulate liquor sales and to restrict consumption of alcohol among people under 21.
But Berman wrote that the “important goals of temperance” should be addressed in a non-discriminatory manner for out-of-state as well as for in-state wineries, which are able to ship products directly to homes in New York.
He said the state admitted during oral arguments that “economic protectionism was the core purpose of the exceptions.”
The New York law is similar to regulations in 29 other states that require imported liquors to be distributed only through licensed wholesalers and retailers to ensure that taxes are paid.
A spokesman for the New York attorney general’s office said the decision was being reviewed.
The judge said that he would decide after a legal conference on Dec. 5 what remedy should result from his ruling.
Berman also rejected arguments that out-of-state wineries could easily get a license in New York to distribute as either a wholesaler or a winery.
“It appears unreasonable to this court to require an out-of-state winery [to] become a resident in order to compete on equal terms,” he said.
“Even when the state is pursuing a clearly legitimate local interest, this particular burden on commerce has been declared to be virtually per se illegal,” he said.