|
|
|
|
|
|
by neekburm
3157 days ago
|
|
|
This was the crux of state regulators' arguments in Granholm v. Heald, and it failed there. From Wikipedia: "The context of the 21st Amendment, they wrote, was to return to the status quo that existed before Prohibition, making it clear that the states had the power to regulate alcohol however they wished, including banning alcoholic beverages entirely within the state if desired. Before Prohibition, the states did not have the power to violate the Dormant Commerce Clause, and the 21st Amendment was not intended to grant them this power." |
|
|