The Tennessee Wine Case and the 21st Amendment

We the People

National Constitution Center

News, News Commentary, History

4.6 • 1.1K Ratings

🗓️ 14 February 2019

⏱️ 58 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

For We the People listeners enjoying wine this Valentine’s Day – we’re exploring the still-pending Supreme Court case Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v. Blair. This lawsuit was brought by Total Wine & More, a retail liquor giant, and the Ketchums, a family who moved to Tennessee hoping to open a liquor store. Both parties were denied retail liquor licenses because they hadn’t resided in Tennessee long enough. This episode examines a variety of technical but fascinating legal and constitutional questions at issue in the case, including the history of the 21st Amendment, the scope of the Dormant Commerce Clause, and the interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities clause. Two advocates involved in the case, Michael Bindas of the Institute for Justice and John Neiman of the law firm Maynard Cooper, join host Jeffrey Rosen for a wide-ranging discussion about it. Questions or comments about the podcast? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	I'm Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, and welcome to We The People, a weekly show of constitutional debate.
0:15.0	The National Constitution Center is the only institution in America chartered by Congress
0:20.0	to increase awareness and understanding of the Constitution among the American people.
0:25.0	And on this episode we explore the pending Supreme Court case, Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association against Blair.
0:34.3	And in the course of that, we will unpack the fascinating and often forgotten text and history
0:39.3	of the 21st Amendment. Joining us to dive into the technical but completely fascinating constitutional issues
0:46.8	surrounding not only the 21st Amendment for a special Valentine's Day episode,
0:51.6	but also the Dormant Commerce Clause to end any
0:54.2	Valentine's like celebrations, and the Privileges and Immunities Clause, which is always
0:58.7	an occasion for Celebration and Champagne Toasts, are two of America's leading Supreme Court advocates
1:05.3	who've been especially involved in the case and we're honored to.
1:09.7	Michael Bindus is a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice.
1:13.0	He litigates in courts nationwide in court cases involving freedom of speech, economic liberty,
1:18.8	and educational choice, and he directs the Institute for Justice's National Food Freedom Initiative.
1:25.0	Michael was the Council of Record in this case for the respondents, the Ketchum family.
1:30.0	Michael, thank you so much for joining.
1:32.0	Thank you for having me, Jeff.
1:34.4	And John Neiman is a member of the Maynard Cooper
1:37.3	General Litigation Group and chair of the firm's Appellate
1:40.3	Practice Group.
1:41.4	He focuses on constitutional and regulatory litigation, and he was the former
1:45.8	solicitor general of the state of Alabama. John filed an amicus brief in support of
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from National Constitution Center, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of National Constitution Center and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.