Libation Law Blog

New on Libation Law Blog: Ohio says the Sixth Circuit created a wine-shipping circuit split worthy of Supreme Court review. Maybe. Or maybe the court simply applied Tennessee Wine, looked at the evidence, and Ohio lost the record. Sometimes “circuit split” is just a nicer name for sour grapes. That matters for alcohol law.

Ohio can regulate hemp, but it cannot build an Ohio-only market for federally lawful hemp products. A new N.D. Ohio TRO against S.B. 56 is a warning to states drafting “safety” laws that operate like protectionism. Read about it on Libation Law Blog.

Maryland’s Furlong v. Brown beer delivery case shows why states may not save local-only alcohol privileges by requiring delivery through “own employees.” The dormant Commerce Clause problem may be practical access, not just statutory wording. Read it on Libation Law Blog:

Illinois distributors and RTD producers should watch IDOR’s proposed liquor tax overhaul. The rule may push low-ABV spirit-based products into the $8.55 spirits rate and revive the uniformity-clause problem Illinois already lost in Federated Distributors v. Johnson. Read about it on LibationLawBlog:

Illinois HB 5784 would impose a July 1, 2026 state ban on low-dose hemp THC beverages, using a 0.4 mg per-container cap that would push 5 mg and 10 mg cans out of ordinary retail. Regulators should regulate, not eliminate—read about it on Libation Law Blog

Maine forced Tito’s into state-controlled spirits warehouse, required title to stay with the supplier, then used that forced title as tax nexus. Beer, wine, and spirits manufacturers, importers, and distributors should review bailment, title-transfer, and warehouse terms before the next audit.

The Supreme Court denied cert in Day v. Henry and Chicago Wine v. Braun, leaving the retailer direct-shipping fight alive but far from decided. Three-tier did not collapse, Block remains the live wire, and the sky did not fall. Read it on Libation Law Blog:

A bourbon fight over who was “first” just became a Lanham Act lesson for every beverage brand. The Sixth Circuit affirmed Fresh Bourbon’s win and reminded advertisers that ambiguity is not literal falsity—and litigation over bragging rights can get expensive. Read about it on Libation Law Blog:

Block v. Canepa is the retailer DTC win plaintiffs wanted—but not the death of three-tier. The Sixth Circuit’s real message: states need evidence, not slogans, to defend discriminatory shipping laws. My take on the risks, remedies, and wholesaler playbook. Read about it at Libation Law Blog:

Can Nebraska make a cocktail bar get a barber license because it calls itself “The Barber Shop”? A federal court said the name and barber pole were inherently misleading. I think that gets the First Amendment wrong—and should worry every themed bar and restaurant. New post on Libation Law Blog:

A federal court just found Michigan’s warrantless liquor inspection law unconstitutional. Alcohol licensees should cooperate with lawful inspections — but also know where the Fourth Amendment still draws a line.

When a distributor loses a brand, the tax fight may already be in the paperwork. New on Libation Law Blog: practical lessons from Young’s on brand transfer agreements, settlements, and tax risk.

Who owns the brewery logo when the original deal was little more than a handshake? Our latest looks at Fuss v. Bensch and what brewers should do before a sale, rebrand, or diligence process.

We prevailed through a hard-fought Chicago zoning battle that began before the Chicago Zoning Board of Appeals and continued through the circuit court and the Illinois First District Appellate Court. In my latest Libation Law Blog post, I discuss what this win means for cannabis dispensaries.

When a supplier walks away from unsold alcohol inventory, distributors don’t have to eat the storage costs. A New York court just awarded $1.1M after a supplier ignored its wind-down obligations. Important lessons for distributors.

“Unquestionably legitimate” started as dicta. It’s now doing real doctrinal work. Day v. Henry asks whether courts must require evidence under Tennessee Wine—or whether calling a rule an “essential feature” ends the case.

Is shelf-stocking now an illegal inducement? A new Connecticut appellate decision treats routine wholesaler merchandising as per se unlawful—without evidence of coercion, exclusivity, or control. The problem: federal tied-house rules and most states allow it. Here’s why CT's ruling is wrong.