Let commerce flow.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Monday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing consumers to buy directly from out-of-state wineries is welcome news not only for vintners and wine drinkers, but for anyone who does business across state lines.

The 5-4 decision struck down laws in Michigan and New York on grounds that they discriminated against out-of-state wineries by barring them from selling directly to customers, while allowing local vintners to do so. The court rightly affirmed that the U.S. Constitution protects interstate commerce and that trade should flow freely between states without restraint.

The 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition in 1933, gave states the power to regulate liquor sales. States were authorized to ban the sales of alcohol products entirely, if they chose to do so, or they could delegate that power to counties that wanted to remain "dry."

The amendment was not intended, however, to allow states to impose laws that unfairly help local wine producers by restricting out-of-state vintners. The court properly ruled that the Constitution's Commerce Clause requires the unimpeded flow of commerce among states - a flow that Justice Anthony Kennedy declared "is essential to the foundation of the Union." Without protection of free trade across state lines, Kennedy wrote that the nation would be torn apart by "trade wars" and "economic Balkan- ization."

By a surprisingly slim margin, the court rejected claims by some states that the trade restrictions were necessary to protect minors from buying alcohol by the phone or Internet. Few, if any, teens in Michigan or New York are likely to order cases of a pricey Pinot Noir from a Willamette Valley winery. Moreover, states are free to impose regulations requiring adults to sign for out-of-state alcohol purchases.

The ruling should provide a nice boost for Oregon's economy. The state is the nation's fourth-largest wine producer with more than 300 wineries, most of them small specialty vineyards. Many rely on direct shipping and have struggled to get their products onto store shelves and wine lists, since most major distributors deal exclusively with large wineries that produce thousands of cases annually.

It remains to be seen how state legislatures respond to the ruling in the nearly two dozen states that impose restrictions on out-of-state vintners. While states still have the option of barring shipments from out of state, they must subject home-state wineries to the same restrictions - a prospect unlikely to appeal to local vintners or consumers.

Oregon's small wineries, and those in other states, should not have to navigate a maze of conflicting laws across the country. Consumers should be free to order their favorite labels by catalog, phone or Internet from out-of-state wineries. The Constitution protects interstate trade, and that trade should flow freely, unimpeded by protectionist corks, throughout the country.