{"title":"酿造紧张:印第安纳州周日啤酒携带法的合宪性","authors":"Danielle M. Teagarden","doi":"10.18060/18354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our United States Constitution contains both the Commerce Clause and the Twenty-first Amendment, however after decades of jurisprudence, the interplay between the two is still unclear. While providing background on brewery history in the United States and the emergence of the three-tier distribution system following the passage of the Twenty-first Amendment, this Article explores the boundaries of each constitutional provision and examines the legitimacy of the prevailing regulatory framework for alcohol sales. Using Indiana's beer laws as a lens, the Article builds upon jurisprudence set forth in 2005's landmark Granholm v. Heald case and Seventh Circuit interpretations of it, ultimately urging an analysis for discriminatory-impact state legislation that may render Indiana's current beer laws unconstitutional, as needlessly protectionist.","PeriodicalId":175783,"journal":{"name":"Food Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brewing Tension: The Constitutionality of Indiana's Sunday Beer-Carryout Laws\",\"authors\":\"Danielle M. Teagarden\",\"doi\":\"10.18060/18354\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Our United States Constitution contains both the Commerce Clause and the Twenty-first Amendment, however after decades of jurisprudence, the interplay between the two is still unclear. While providing background on brewery history in the United States and the emergence of the three-tier distribution system following the passage of the Twenty-first Amendment, this Article explores the boundaries of each constitutional provision and examines the legitimacy of the prevailing regulatory framework for alcohol sales. Using Indiana's beer laws as a lens, the Article builds upon jurisprudence set forth in 2005's landmark Granholm v. Heald case and Seventh Circuit interpretations of it, ultimately urging an analysis for discriminatory-impact state legislation that may render Indiana's current beer laws unconstitutional, as needlessly protectionist.\",\"PeriodicalId\":175783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Food Law & Policy eJournal\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Food Law & Policy eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18060/18354\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Law & Policy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18060/18354","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Brewing Tension: The Constitutionality of Indiana's Sunday Beer-Carryout Laws
Our United States Constitution contains both the Commerce Clause and the Twenty-first Amendment, however after decades of jurisprudence, the interplay between the two is still unclear. While providing background on brewery history in the United States and the emergence of the three-tier distribution system following the passage of the Twenty-first Amendment, this Article explores the boundaries of each constitutional provision and examines the legitimacy of the prevailing regulatory framework for alcohol sales. Using Indiana's beer laws as a lens, the Article builds upon jurisprudence set forth in 2005's landmark Granholm v. Heald case and Seventh Circuit interpretations of it, ultimately urging an analysis for discriminatory-impact state legislation that may render Indiana's current beer laws unconstitutional, as needlessly protectionist.