A federal judge struck down a Minnesota law that prohibits wineries from making wine unless a majority of the grapes are grown in Minnesota — a ruling cheered by vineyards across the state.
“This is a huge win for the future of the wine industry and small wineries in Minnesota,” Nan Bailly, owner of Alexis Bailly Vineyard in Hastings, said in a statement. “We are finally free to make the wines we want to make, not the wine dictated by the state legislature.”
Minnesota’s law, versions of which are enforced in about a dozen other states, made it difficult for the state’s burgeoning wine industry to make wines that were appealing to consumers.
In Monday’s ruling, Judge Wilhelmina Wright found the law violates the Interstate Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Her decision may have implications in other states with similar laws, such as New York, Pennsylvania and Illinois.
Northern grape varieties, which are grown with some difficulty in Minnesota, often produce wine that is too acidic for most consumers. To make a Minnesota wine palatable, most wineries blend Minnesota grapes with grapes grown elsewhere to create a wine that is essentially Minnesotan but more appealing to a traditional palate.
The state’s law mandating that Minnesota grapes constitute the majority of a winery’s final product therefore handicaps vintners. By contrast, Minnesota’s biggest craft beer breweries, like Summit and Surly Brewing, are among the most successful in the country, thanks in part to a variety of hops grown in the Pacific Northwest that flavor their signature beers.
“The U.S. Constitution was crafted to guarantee free trade among the states,” said Anthony Sanders, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, which teamed up with Nan Bailly to challenge the state law. “Minnesota violated this founding ideal by restricting the grapes that wineries can purchase from other states. This is a vindication of our client’s rights and also of that founding ideal of free trade.”