Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:


Granholm v. Heald

Docket No.: 03-1116
Certiorari Granted: 5/24/2004
Argued: December 7, 2004
Decided: May 16, 2005
Consolidated with: 03-112003-1274


Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 3: Interstate Commerce Clause, Economic Activity, Amendment 1, Amendment 2, Article I, Commerce Clause, Constitutional Law, Due Process, Eighteenth Amendment, Eleventh Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, Establishment Clause, First Amendment, Internal Revenue Code, Twenty-First Amendment, patent, retaliation

PartyNames: Jennifer M. Granholm, Governor of Michigan, et al. v. Eleanor Heald, et al.
Petitioner: Jennifer M. Granholm, Governor of Michigan, et al.
Respondent: Eleanor Heald, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Citation: 342 F3d 517
Supreme Court Docket

Jennifer M. Granholm, Governor of Michigan, et al.
Eleanor Heald, et al.
544 U.S. 460 (2005)

Under state law, the Michigan Liquor Control Commission generally bans out-of- state direct shipment of alcoholic liquor to consumers' doorsteps, but permits in- state licensed wineries to direct ship to consumers, and out-of-state wineries to import through in-state licensed wholesalers. Out-of-state wineries may also petition the State Liquor Control Commission for an order permitting them to ship wine directly to consumers in the State. Any denial of such a request may be appealed through the State court system. Section 2 of the 21st Amendment to the United States Constitution expressly prohibits importation of alcoholic beverages into any state for delivery or use, in violation of the laws of the State. The Court of Appeals declared Michigan's alcoholic liquor importation law facially unconstitutional in violation of the Commerce Clause.

Question Presented:

Does Michigan's regulation of the importation of beverage alcohol under the 21st Amendment facially violate the Commerce Clause when it permits in-state licensed wineries to directly ship alcohol to consumers, but requires out-of-state wineries to import its products through licensed in-state wholesalers and to sell its products through licensed retailers or request permission of the Liquor Control Commission to bypass this distribution system and ship directly to consumers?


Does a state law that allows in-state wineries to directly ship alcohol to consumers, but restricts the ability of out-of-state wineries to do so, violate the dormant commerce clause in light of the 21st Amendment?

Granholm v. Heald

December 7, 2004

Holding: affirmed
Decision: Decision: 5 votes for Heald, 4 vote(s) against
Opinion By: Justice Anthony M. Kennedy

Warning: Use of undefined constant caseTitle - assumed 'caseTitle' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/supremec/public_html/supremecourtobserver.com/code/sofunctionsndb.php on line 1147

Granholm v. Heald
Case Documents

1Slip Opinion in Granholm v. Heald (Opinion by )
2Opinion in Granholm v. Heald
3Opinion in Granholm v. Heald
Additional documents for this case are pending review.