Russell Bridenbaugh v. Karen Freeman-Wilson, Attorney General of Indiana

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that consumers had standing to challenge a state law that resulted in their payment of excise taxes to wine sellers
• looking to state law and the “text and history of the Constitution” rather than a factual record to uphold an Indiana law banning direct alcohol shipments to Indiana customers from out- of-state sellers
• “If the product were cheese rather than wine, Indiana would not be able either to close its borders to imports-”
• “[S]tates discriminated against in-state sellers, because they could not effectively govern direct shipments from elsewhere.”
• “[Section] 2 of the twenty-first amendment empowers Indiana to control alcohol in ways that it cannot control cheese.”
• “America changed course in 1933 and repealed the eighteenth amendment [establishing Prohibition] by § 1 of the twenty-first.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).