Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

D. Andrew Wilson, Attorney General of Ohio v. Kenneth M. Miller, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 25-3305 · judgment May 6, 2026


Certiorari denied · October 13, 2026
Pre-decision estimate: 18% cert probability (95% interval 11%–29%)

Before the decision, about 4.4× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a petition filed soon after the judgment below, a state or local-government petitioner, and a circuit split argued in the petition.

Question presented

The Twenty-first Amendment grants to the States the power to regulate the “transportation or importation” of alcohol into the States. U.S. Const. amend. XXI, §2. Employing that authority, Ohio operates a three-tier system for the sale and distribution of wine. Wine suppliers must sell to licensed wholesalers with a physical presence in Ohio; wine wholesalers must sell to licensed retailers that maintain a physical presence in Ohio; and only those licensed retailers may sell wine to consumers in Ohio. Wine sold in Ohio must, generally, pass through all three tiers. Doing so reduces alcohol consumption and serves the State’s health and safety goals by facilitating inspection of in-state retail premises and products meant for consumption in Ohio as well as ensuring adherence to other Ohio liquor laws. This system is “unquestionably legitimate.” Granholm v. Heald, 544 U.S. 460, 489 (2005) (quotation omitted). To seal off leaks from the three-tier funnel, Ohio law imposes two restrictions: (1) retailers located outside Ohio may not directly ship wine to consumers in Ohio and (2) individuals may not personally transport more than six bottles of wine, per thirtyday period, into the State. The Question Presented is: under §2 of the Twenty-first Amendment, may a State restrict out-of-state retailers from directly shipping alcohol to in-state consumers and may it cap the amount of alcohol that individuals may personally transport into the State?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Mathura Jaya Sridharan
Ohio Attorney General's Office

For respondent
Martha Brewer Motley
Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

Case

Subject area
Economic Activity (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Amicus briefs
2 cert-stage

Order
Order list, October 13, 2026 · Certiorari denied

Proceedings

  1. Oct 13 2026
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Sep 23 2026
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2026.
  3. Sep 17 2026
    Reply of petitioner D. Andrew Wilson, Attorney General of Ohio filed.
  4. Sep 09 2026
    Brief of respondents Kenneth Miller, et al. in opposition filed.
  5. Sep 04 2026
    Brief amicus curiae of Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers Association filed.
  6. Aug 06 2026
    Waiver of right of respondent Whole Beer & Wine Association of Ohio, Intervenor in lower courts to respond filed.
  7. Jul 28 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including September 9, 2026.
  8. Jul 27 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 10, 2026 to September 9, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
  9. Jul 08 2026
    Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Wine Retailers filed.
  10. Jul 01 2026
    Letter from petitioner pursuant to Rule 35.3 received.
  11. Jun 23 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 10, 2026.
  12. Jun 22 2026
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 9, 2026 to August 10, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
  13. Jun 05 2026
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 9, 2026)