california
liquor
dealers
midcal
aluminum
argued
january
decided
march
california
statute
requires
wine
producers
wholesalers
file
fair
trade
contracts
price
schedules
state
producer
set
prices
fair
trade
contract
wholesalers
must
post
resale
price
schedule
prohibited
selling
wine
retailer
price
set
price
schedule
fair
trade
contract
wholesaler
selling
established
prices
faces
fines
license
suspension
revocation
charged
selling
wine
less
prices
set
price
schedules
also
selling
wines
fair
trade
contract
schedule
filed
respondent
wholesaler
filed
suit
california
appeal
asking
injunction
state
wine
pricing
scheme
appeal
ruled
scheme
restrains
trade
violation
sherman
act
granted
injunctive
relief
rejecting
claims
scheme
immune
liability
act
state
action
doctrine
parker
brown
also
protected
amendment
prohibits
transportation
importation
intoxicating
liquors
state
delivery
use
therein
violation
state
laws
held
california
wine
pricing
system
constitutes
resale
price
maintenance
violation
sherman
act
since
wine
producer
holds
power
prevent
price
competition
dictating
prices
charged
wholesalers
state
involvement
system
insufficient
establish
antitrust
immunity
parker
brown
supra
system
satisfies
first
requirement
immunity
challenged
restraint
one
clearly
articulated
affirmatively
expressed
state
policy
meet
requirement
policy
actively
supervised
state
system
state
simply
authorizes
price
setting
enforces
prices
established
private
parties
establish
prices
review
reasonableness
price
schedules
regulate
terms
fair
trade
contracts
monitor
market
conditions
engage
pointed
reexamination
program
national
policy
favor
competition
thwarted
casting
gauzy
cloak
state
involvement
essentially
private
arrangement
pp
amendment
bar
application
sherman
act
california
wine
pricing
system
pp
although
amendment
retain
substantial
discretion
establish
liquor
regulations
governing
importation
sale
liquor
structure
liquor
distribution
system
controls
may
subject
federal
commerce
power
appropriate
situations
pp
basis
disagreeing
view
california
courts
asserted
state
interests
behind
resale
price
maintenance
system
promoting
temperance
protecting
small
retailers
less
substantial
national
policy
favor
competition
view
reasonable
supported
evidence
nothing
indicate
wine
pricing
system
helps
sustain
small
retailers
inhibits
consumption
alcohol
californians
pp
powell
delivered
opinion
members
joined
except
brennan
took
part
consideration
decision
case
william
chidlaw
argued
cause
filed
briefs
petitioner
jack
owens
argued
cause
respondent
midcal
aluminum
brief
elliot
kaplan
frank
damrell
george
roth
deputy
attorney
general
california
argued
cause
state
california
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
brief
george
deukmejian
attorney
general
curtis
sewell
filed
brief
virginia
beer
wholesalers
association
amicus
curiae
urging
reversal
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
solicitor
general
mccree
assistant
attorney
general
shenefield
deputy
solicitor
general
wallace
elinor
hadley
stillman
barry
grossman
ron
landsman
michael
sohn
kirk
mckenzie
consumers
union
justice
powell
delivered
opinion
action
respondent
midcal
aluminum
wine
distributor
presented
successful
antitrust
challenge
california
resale
price
maintenance
price
posting
statutes
wholesale
wine
trade
issue
case
whether
state
laws
shielded
sherman
act
either
state
action
doctrine
parker
brown
amendment
california
business
professions
code
wine
producers
wholesalers
rectifiers
must
file
fair
trade
contracts
price
schedules
state
wine
producer
set
prices
fair
trade
contract
wholesalers
must
post
resale
price
schedule
producer
brands
wine
merchant
may
sell
wine
retailer
price
set
either
effective
price
schedule
effective
fair
trade
contract
west
supp
state
divided
three
trading
areas
administration
wine
pricing
program
single
fair
trade
contract
schedule
brand
sets
terms
wholesale
transactions
brand
within
given
trading
area
west
supp
similarly
state
regulations
provide
wine
prices
posted
single
wholesaler
within
trading
area
bind
wholesalers
area
midcal
aluminum
rice
cal
app
cal
rptr
licensee
selling
established
prices
faces
fines
license
suspension
outright
license
revocation
cal
bus
code
ann
west
supp
state
direct
control
wine
prices
review
reasonableness
prices
set
wine
dealers
midcal
aluminum
wholesale
distributor
wine
southern
california
july
department
alcoholic
beverage
control
charged
midcal
selling
cases
wine
less
prices
set
effective
price
schedule
gallo
winery
department
also
alleged
midcal
sold
wines
fair
trade
contract
schedule
filed
midcal
stipulated
allegations
true
state
fine
suspend
license
transgressions
app
midcal
filed
writ
mandate
california
appeal
third
appellate
district
asking
injunction
state
wine
pricing
system
appeal
ruled
wine
pricing
scheme
restrains
trade
violation
sherman
act
et
seq
relied
entirely
reasoning
rice
alcoholic
beverage
control
appeals
cal
california
struck
parallel
restrictions
sale
distilled
liquors
case
held
state
played
passive
part
liquor
pricing
parker
brown
immunity
program
price
maintenance
program
us
state
plays
role
whatever
setting
retail
prices
prices
established
producers
according
economic
interests
without
regard
actual
potential
anticompetitive
effect
state
role
restricted
enforcing
prices
specified
producers
control
pointed
state
insure
policies
sherman
act
unnecessarily
subordinated
state
policy
cal
instant
case
state
appeal
found
analysis
rice
squarely
controlling
cal
app
cal
ordered
department
alcoholic
beverage
control
enforce
resale
price
maintenance
price
posting
statutes
wine
trade
department
rice
sought
certiorari
appeal
ruling
case
appeal
brought
california
retail
liquor
dealers
association
intervenor
california
declined
hear
case
dealers
association
sought
certiorari
granted
writ
affirm
decision
state
ii
threshold
question
whether
california
plan
wine
pricing
violates
sherman
act
ruled
consistently
resale
price
maintenance
illegally
restrains
trade
dr
miles
medical
john
park
sons
observed
arrangements
designed
maintain
prices
prevent
competition
among
trade
competing
goods
see
albrecht
herald
parke
davis
schrader
son
many
years
however
act
permitted
authorize
resale
price
maintenance
stat
goal
statute
allow
protect
small
retail
establishments
congress
thought
might
otherwise
driven
marketplace
discounters
congressional
permission
rescinded
consumer
goods
pricing
act
stat
repealed
act
related
legislation
consequently
sherman
act
ban
resale
price
maintenance
applies
fair
trade
contracts
unless
industry
program
enjoys
special
antitrust
immunity
california
system
wine
pricing
plainly
constitutes
resale
price
maintenance
violation
sherman
act
schwegmann
calvert
see
albrecht
herald
supra
joseph
seagram
sons
dr
miles
medical
john
park
sons
supra
wine
producer
holds
power
prevent
price
competition
dictating
prices
charged
wholesalers
justice
hughes
pointed
dr
miles
vertical
control
destroys
horizontal
competition
effectively
wholesalers
formed
combination
endeavored
establish
restrictions
agreement
moreover
claim
california
program
simply
intrastate
regulation
beyond
reach
sherman
act
see
schwegmann
calvert
supra
burke
ford
per
curiam
thus
must
consider
whether
state
involvement
program
sufficient
establish
antitrust
immunity
parker
brown
immunity
state
regulatory
programs
grounded
federal
structure
dual
system
government
constitution
sovereign
save
congress
may
constitutionally
subtract
authority
unexpressed
purpose
nullify
state
control
officers
agents
lightly
attributed
congress
parker
brown
found
sherman
act
purpose
nullify
state
powers
act
directed
individual
state
action
concluded
state
regulatory
programs
violate
program
challenged
parker
state
agricultural
prorate
advisory
commission
authorized
organization
local
cooperatives
develop
marketing
policies
raisin
crop
emphasized
advisory
commission
appointed
governor
approve
cooperative
policies
following
public
hearings
state
created
machinery
establishing
prorate
program
state
acting
commission
adopts
program
enforces
ibid
view
extensive
official
oversight
wrote
sherman
act
apply
without
oversight
result
different
expressly
noted
state
give
immunity
violate
sherman
act
authorizing
violate
declaring
action
lawful
several
recent
decisions
applied
parker
analysis
goldfarb
virginia
state
bar
concluded
fee
schedules
enforced
state
bar
association
mandated
ethical
standards
established
state
fee
schedules
therefore
immune
antitrust
attack
enough
anticompetitive
conduct
prompted
state
action
rather
anticompetitive
activities
must
compelled
direction
state
acting
sovereign
similarly
cantor
detroit
edison
majority
found
antitrust
immunity
conferred
state
agency
passively
accepted
public
utility
tariff
contrast
arizona
rules
lawyer
advertising
held
immune
sherman
act
challenge
reflect
ed
clear
articulation
state
policy
regard
professional
behavior
subject
pointed
policymaker
arizona
enforcement
proceedings
bates
state
bar
arizona
last
term
found
antitrust
immunity
california
program
requiring
state
approval
location
new
automobile
dealerships
new
motor
vehicle
bd
cal
orrin
fox
program
provided
state
hold
hearing
automobile
franchisee
protested
establishment
relocation
competing
dealership
view
state
active
role
held
program
subject
sherman
act
clearly
articulated
affirmatively
expressed
goal
state
policy
displace
unfettered
business
freedom
matter
establishment
relocation
automobile
dealerships
decisions
establish
two
standards
antitrust
immunity
parker
brown
first
challenged
restraint
must
one
clearly
articulated
affirmatively
expressed
state
policy
second
policy
must
actively
supervised
state
city
lafayette
louisiana
power
light
opinion
brennan
california
system
wine
pricing
satisfies
first
standard
legislative
policy
forthrightly
stated
clear
purpose
permit
resale
price
maintenance
program
however
meet
second
requirement
parker
immunity
state
simply
authorizes
price
setting
enforces
prices
established
private
parties
state
neither
establishes
prices
reviews
reasonableness
price
schedules
regulate
terms
fair
trade
contracts
state
monitor
market
conditions
engage
pointed
reexamination
program
national
policy
favor
competition
thwarted
casting
gauzy
cloak
state
involvement
essentially
private
arrangement
parker
teaches
state
give
immunity
violate
sherman
act
authorizing
violate
declaring
action
lawful
iii
petitioner
contends
even
california
system
wine
pricing
protected
state
action
amendment
bars
application
sherman
act
case
section
amendment
repealed
eighteenth
amendment
prohibition
manufacture
sale
transportation
liquor
second
section
reserved
certain
power
regulate
traffic
liquor
transportation
importation
state
territory
possession
delivery
use
therein
intoxicating
liquors
violation
laws
thereof
hereby
prohibited
remaining
question
us
whether
permits
california
countermand
congressional
policy
adopted
commerce
power
favor
competition
determining
state
powers
amendment
focused
primarily
language
provision
rather
history
behind
state
board
young
market
terms
amendment
gives
control
transportation
importation
liquor
territories
course
control
logically
entails
considerable
regulatory
power
strictly
limited
importing
transporting
alcohol
ziffrin
reeves
however
lose
sight
explicit
grant
authority
early
decisions
amendment
recognized
state
holds
great
powers
importation
liquor
jurisdictions
young
market
supra
concerned
license
fee
interstate
imports
alcohol
another
case
focused
law
restricting
types
liquor
imported
mahoney
joseph
triner
two
others
involved
retaliation
statutes
barring
imports
proscribed
shipments
liquor
joseph
finch
mckittrick
indianapolis
brewing
liquor
control
upheld
challenged
state
authority
case
largely
basis
special
power
importation
transportation
intoxicating
liquors
yet
even
acted
explicit
terms
amendment
resisted
contention
freed
restrictions
upon
police
power
found
provisions
constitution
young
market
supra
subsequent
decisions
given
wide
latitude
state
liquor
regulation
joseph
seagram
sons
hostetter
also
stressed
important
federal
interests
liquor
matters
survived
ratification
amendment
tax
imported
liquor
violation
clause
department
revenue
james
beam
insulate
liquor
industry
fourteenth
amendment
requirements
equal
protection
craig
boren
due
process
wisconsin
constantineau
difficult
define
however
extent
congress
regulate
liquor
interstate
commerce
power
although
power
directly
qualified
held
federal
government
retains
commerce
clause
authority
liquor
william
jameson
morgenthau
per
curiam
found
violation
amendment
requirement
prescribed
federal
alcohol
administration
act
stat
ziffrin
reeves
supra
uphold
kentucky
system
licensing
liquor
haulers
satisfied
state
program
reasonable
contours
congress
commerce
power
liquor
sharpened
hostetter
idlewild
liquor
draw
conclusion
amendment
somehow
operated
repeal
commerce
clause
wherever
regulation
intoxicating
liquors
concerned
however
absurd
oversimplification
commerce
clause
pro
tanto
repealed
congress
left
regulatory
power
interstate
foreign
commerce
intoxicating
liquor
conclusion
patently
bizarre
demonstrably
incorrect
pragmatic
effort
harmonize
state
federal
powers
evident
several
decisions
held
liquor
companies
liable
anticompetitive
conduct
mandated
state
see
joseph
seagram
sons
frankfort
distilleries
schwegmann
calvert
example
liquor
manufacturer
attempted
force
distributor
comply
louisiana
resale
price
maintenance
program
program
similar
many
respects
california
system
issue
held
louisiana
statute
violated
sherman
act
enforced
distributor
fifteen
years
later
rejected
sherman
act
challenge
new
york
law
requiring
liquor
dealers
attest
prices
higher
lowest
price
charged
anywhere
joseph
seagram
sons
hostetter
supra
concluded
statute
exerted
irresistible
economic
pressure
dealers
violate
sherman
act
order
comply
also
cautioned
othing
amendment
course
prevent
enforcement
sherman
act
interstate
conspiracy
fix
liquor
prices
see
burke
ford
per
curiam
decisions
demonstrate
bright
line
federal
state
powers
liquor
amendment
grants
virtually
complete
control
whether
permit
importation
sale
liquor
structure
liquor
distribution
system
although
retain
substantial
discretion
establish
liquor
regulations
controls
may
subject
federal
commerce
power
appropriate
situations
competing
state
federal
interests
reconciled
careful
scrutiny
concerns
concrete
case
hostetter
idlewild
liquor
supra
federal
interest
enforcing
national
policy
favor
competition
familiar
substantial
antitrust
laws
general
sherman
act
particular
magna
carta
free
enterprise
important
preservation
economic
freedom
system
bill
rights
protection
fundamental
personal
freedoms
topco
associates
state
interests
protected
california
resale
price
maintenance
system
identified
state
courts
case
cal
app
cal
rice
alcoholic
beverage
control
appeals
cal
course
findings
conclusions
courts
binding
extent
undercut
state
rights
guaranteed
amendment
see
hooven
allison
evatt
creswill
knights
pythias
nevertheless
accords
respectful
consideration
great
weight
views
state
highest
matters
state
law
indiana
ex
rel
anderson
brand
customarily
accept
factual
findings
state
courts
absence
exceptional
circumstances
lloyd
fry
roofing
wood
california
appeal
stated
review
state
system
wine
pricing
controlled
reasoning
california
rice
supra
cal
app
cal
therefore
turn
opinion
treatment
state
interests
resale
price
maintenance
distilled
liquors
rice
state
found
two
purposes
behind
liquor
resale
price
maintenance
promote
temperance
orderly
market
conditions
cal
found
little
correlation
resale
price
maintenance
temperance
cited
state
study
showing
increase
per
capita
liquor
consumption
california
resale
price
maintenance
effect
citing
california
dept
finance
alcohol
state
reappraisal
california
alcohol
control
policies
xi
studies
wrote
least
raise
doubt
regarding
justification
laws
ground
promote
temperance
cal
rice
opinion
identified
primary
state
interest
orderly
market
conditions
protect
ing
small
licensees
predatory
pricing
policies
large
retailers
gauging
interest
adopted
views
appeals
board
alcoholic
beverages
control
department
first
ruled
claim
rice
state
agency
rejected
argument
fair
trade
laws
necessary
economic
survival
small
retailers
ibid
agency
relied
congressional
study
impact
small
retailers
fair
trade
laws
enacted
act
study
revealed
fair
trade
laws
percent
higher
rate
firm
failures
free
trade
rate
growth
small
retail
stores
free
trade
per
cent
higher
fair
trade
laws
citing
pointing
congressional
abandonment
fair
trade
consumer
goods
pricing
act
see
supra
state
found
persuasive
justification
continue
fair
trade
laws
eliminate
price
competition
among
retailers
cal
appeal
came
conclusion
respect
wholesale
wine
trade
cal
app
cal
basis
disagreeing
view
california
courts
asserted
state
interests
less
substantial
national
policy
favor
competition
evaluation
resale
price
maintenance
system
wine
reasonable
supported
evidence
cited
state
rice
nothing
record
case
suggests
wine
pricing
system
helps
sustain
small
retail
establishments
neither
petitioner
state
attorney
general
amicus
brief
demonstrated
program
inhibits
consumption
alcohol
californians
need
consider
whether
legitimate
state
interests
temperance
protection
small
retailers
ever
prevail
undoubted
federal
interest
competitive
economy
unsubstantiated
state
concerns
put
forward
case
simply
stature
goals
sherman
act
conclude
california
appeal
correctly
decided
amendment
provides
shelter
violation
sherman
act
caused
state
wine
pricing
program
judgment
california
appeal
third
appellate
district
affirmed
footnotes
wine
grower
wholesaler
licensed
sell
wine
wine
rectifier
rectifier
shall
post
schedule
selling
prices
wine
retailers
consumers
resale
price
governed
fair
trade
contract
made
person
owns
controls
brand
make
file
fair
trade
contract
file
schedule
resale
prices
owns
controls
brand
wine
resold
retailers
consumers
cal
bus
code
ann
west
licensees
sell
wine
prices
specified
fair
trade
contracts
schedules
also
may
subject
private
damages
suits
unfair
competition
west
cited
record
evidence
july
five
leading
brands
gin
sold
california
fifth
gallon
five
leading
brands
scotch
whiskey
sold
either
fifth
rice
alcoholic
beverage
control
appeals
cal
nn
nn
state
also
appeal
decision
capiscean
alcoholic
beverage
control
appeals
cal
app
cal
rptr
used
analysis
rice
invalidate
california
resale
price
maintenance
scheme
retail
wine
sales
consumers
california
retail
liquor
dealers
association
trade
association
independent
retail
liquor
dealers
california
claims
members
congressional
reports
accompanying
consumer
goods
pricing
act
noted
repeal
fair
trade
authority
alter
whatever
power
hold
amendment
control
liquor
prices
consider
effect
amendment
case
part
iii
infra
rice
california
found
direct
evidence
resale
price
maintenance
resulted
horizontal
price
fixing
see
supra
although
appeal
made
specific
finding
case
noted
wine
pricing
system
upheld
reasons
retail
price
maintenance
provisions
declared
invalid
rice
midcal
aluminum
rice
cal
app
cal
rptr
see
norman
waterfront
wheatley
asheville
tobacco
bd
ftc
note
parker
brown
revisited
state
action
doctrine
goldfarb
cantor
bates
colum
rev
california
program
contrasts
approach
completely
control
distribution
liquor
within
boundaries
code
comprehensive
regulation
immune
sherman
act
parker
brown
since
state
displace
unfettered
business
freedom
power
new
motor
vehicle
bd
cal
orrin
fox
see
state
board
young
market
approach
supported
sound
canons
constitutional
interpretation
demonstrates
wise
reluctance
wade
complex
currents
beneath
congressional
proposal
amendment
ratification
state
conventions
senate
sponsor
amendment
resolution
said
purpose
restore
absolute
control
effect
interstate
commerce
affecting
intoxicating
liquors
cong
rec
remarks
blaine
yet
also
made
statements
supporting
midcal
claim
designed
ensure
dry
forced
federal
government
permit
sale
liquor
see
cong
sketchy
records
state
conventions
reflect
consensus
thrust
although
delegates
several
conventions
expressed
hope
state
regulation
liquor
traffic
begin
immediately
brown
ratification
amendment
constitution
wilson
president
idaho
convention
darnall
president
maryland
convention
gaylord
chairman
missouri
convention
resolution
adopted
washington
convention
calling
state
action
regulate
liquor
traffic
see
generally
note
effect
amendment
state
authority
control
intoxicating
liquors
colum
rev
note
economic
localism
state
alcoholic
beverage
laws
experience
amendment
harv
rev
nippert
richmond
commented
ven
commerce
intoxicating
liquors
amendment
gives
highest
degree
control
altogether
beyond
reach
federal
commerce
power
rate
state
regulation
squarely
conflicts
regulation
imposed
congress
unusual
posture
case
reflects
state
california
shown
less
enthusiastic
interest
wine
pricing
system
noted
state
agency
responsible
administering
program
appeal
decision
california
appeal
see
supra
tr
oral
arg
instead
action
maintained
california
retail
liquor
dealers
association
private
intervenor
neither
intervenor
state
attorney
general
filed
brief
amicus
curiae
support
legislative
scheme
specified
state
interests
protected
resale
price
maintenance
system
noted
opinions
cited
text
california
appeal
found
additional
state
interests
instant
case
cal
app
cal
rejected
suggestion
wine
price
program
designed
protect
state
wine
industry
pointing
statutes
distinguish
california
wines
imported
wines
ibid
see
joseph
seagram
sons
hostetter
citing
study
concluding
resale
price
maintenance
new
york
state
significant
effect
upon
consumption
alcoholic
beverages
california
also
stated
orderly
market
conditions
might
reduce
excessive
consumption
thereby
encouraging
temperance
cal
concern
temperance
however
considered
independent
state
interest
resale
price
maintenance
liquor
since
midcal
requested
injunctive
relief
state
question
us
involving
liability
damages