U.S. Code » Title 27 » Chapter CHAPTER 6— TRANSPORTATION IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE

27 U.S.C. § 122a

Injunctive relief in Federal district court

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 27 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) DefinitionsIn this section—(1) the term “attorney general” means the attorney general or other chief law enforcement officer of a State or the designee thereof;(2) the term “intoxicating liquor” means any spirituous, vinous, malted, fermented, or other intoxicating liquor of any kind;(3) the term “person” means any individual and any partnership, corporation, company, firm, society, association, joint stock company, trust, or other entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property, but does not include a State or agency thereof; and(4) the term “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any territory or possession of the United States.(b) Action by State attorney generalIf the attorney general has reasonable cause to believe that a person is engaged in, or has engaged in, any act that would constitute a violation of a State law regulating the importation or transportation of any intoxicating liquor, the attorney general may bring a civil action in accordance with this section for injunctive relief (including a preliminary or permanent injunction) against the person, as the attorney general determines to be necessary to—(1) restrain the person from engaging, or continuing to engage, in the violation; and(2) enforce compliance with the State law.(c) Federal jurisdiction(1) In general

The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction over any action brought under this section by an attorney general against any person, except one licensed or otherwise authorized to produce, sell, or store intoxicating liquor in such State.

(2) Venue

An action under this section may be brought only in accordance with section 1391 of title 28 or in the district in which the recipient of the intoxicating liquor resides or is found.

(3) Form of relief

An action under this section is limited to actions seeking injunctive relief (a preliminary and/or permanent injunction).

(4) No right to jury trial

An action under this section shall be tried before the court.

(d) Requirements for injunctions and orders(1) In general

In any action brought under this section, upon a proper showing by the attorney general of the State, the court may issue a preliminary or permanent injunction to restrain a violation of this section. A proper showing under this paragraph shall require that a State prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a violation of State law as described in subsection (b) has taken place or is taking place.

(2) Additional showing for preliminary injunctionNo preliminary injunction may be granted except upon—(A) evidence demonstrating the probability of irreparable injury if injunctive relief is not granted; and(B) evidence supporting the probability of success on the merits.(3) Notice

No preliminary or permanent injunction may be issued under paragraph (1) without notice to the adverse party and an opportunity for a hearing.

(4) Form and scope of orderAny preliminary or permanent injunction entered in an action brought under this section shall—(A) set forth the reasons for the issuance of the order;(B) be specific in terms;(C) describe in reasonable detail, and not by reference to the complaint or other document, the act or acts sought to be restrained; and(D) be binding upon—(i) the parties to the action and the officers, agents, employees, and attorneys of those parties; and(ii) persons in active concert or participation with the parties to the action who receive actual notice of the order by personal service or otherwise.(5) Admissibility of evidence

In a hearing on an application for a permanent injunction, any evidence previously received on an application for a preliminary injunction in connection with the same civil action and that would otherwise be admissible, may be made a part of the record of the hearing on the permanent injunction.

(e) Rules of constructionThis section shall be construed only to extend the jurisdiction of Federal courts in connection with State law that is a valid exercise of power vested in the States—(1) under the twenty-first article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States as such article of amendment is interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States including interpretations in conjunction with other provisions of the Constitution of the United States; and(2) under section 122 of this title as such section is interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States; but shall not be construed to grant to States any additional power.(f) Additional remedies(1) In general

A remedy under this section is in addition to any other remedies provided by law.

(2) State court proceedings

Nothing in this section may be construed to prohibit an authorized State official from proceeding in State court on the basis of an alleged violation of any State law.

(Mar. 1, 1913, ch. 90, § 2, as added Pub. L. 106–386, div. C, § 2004(a), Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1546.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Pub. L. 106–386, div. C, § 2004(b), Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1548, provided that: “This section [enacting this section and section 122b of this title and provisions set out as a note under this section] and the amendments made by this section shall become effective 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2000].”

Impact Study

Pub. L. 106–386, div. C, § 2004(c), Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1548, provided that: “The Attorney General shall carry out the study to determine the impact of this section [enacting this section and section 122b of this title and provisions set out as a note under this section] and shall submit the results of such study not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act [Oct. 28, 2000].”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2002–2024 · leading case: Bolick v. Roberts, 199 F. Supp. 2d 397 (E.D. Va. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bolick v. Roberts, 199 F. Supp. 2d 397 (E.D. Va. 2002). · cites it 2× “25,2001; codified at 27 U.S.C. § 122a. The Act creates a civil cause of action to enforce state laws in federal court by way of injunction.”
B-21 Wines, Inc. v. Hank Bauer, 36 F.4th 214 (4th Cir. 2022). “See 27 U.S.C. § 122a; FTC Report, supra, at 10.”
Dickerson v. Bailey, 212 F. Supp. 2d 673 (S.D. Tex. 2002). · cites it 2× “106-386, codified at 27 U.S.C. § 122a, enacted on October 26, 2000 and effective January 25, 2001, 6 and an accompanying statement of legislative intent by the bill’s sponsor, Senator Orrin Hatch, which Defendant characterized as a “wholesale adoption of both the holding and…”
Swedenburg v. Kelly, 232 F. Supp. 2d 135 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). · cites it 2× “The Court finds this argument unpersuasive because the Act merely authorizes a state attorney general to enforce state law "regulating the importation or transportation of any intoxicating liquor” in federal court, 27 U.S.C. § 122a(b), and explicitly provides that it “shall not…”
Swedenburg v. Kelly, 358 F.3d 223 (2d Cir. 2004). “the requirements for licensing are somehow arbitrary or unrelated to the state’s desire to regulate the industry. They simply argue the costs are too high to warrant entry into the market.”
Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Schnorf, 738 F. Supp. 2d 793 (N.D. Ill. 2010). “1885 ; 27 U.S.C. § 122a(b). Defendants do not address this statute or explain why it would be ineffective to exert regulatory control over entities that are not local.”
Nessel v. Dineen Fam. Vineyards, L.L.C. (W.D. Mich. 2024). · cites it 3× “Defendant must immediately and adequately train and educate its directors, officers, managers, agents, members, assigns, and employees that 1 “Intoxicating liquor” is defined as that term is defined in 27 U.S.C. § 122a(a)(2) and includes “alcoholic liquor” as that term is…”
Manuel v. State, Off. of Alcoh. & Tobacco, 982 So. 2d 316 (La. Ct. App. 2008). “See generally 27 U.S.C. §§ 122a & 122b (21st Amendment Enforcement Act left intact States' authority over alcoholic beverage distribution within their boundaries while providing them injunctive remedy against violators); 42 U.”
Nessel v. Vokel Cellars, Inc. d/b/a Vokel Cellars (E.D. Mich. 2022). · cites it 2× “Laws §§ 436.1101 , et seq., regulating the importation or transportation of intoxicating liquor and the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, Mich.”
Nessel v. Lady Hill LLC (E.D. Mich. 2023). “1 “Intoxicating liquor” is defined as that term is defined in 27 U.S.C. § 122a(a)(2) and includes “alcoholic liquor” as that term is defined in the Michigan Liquor Control Code, Mich.”
Nessel v. Bolo Cellars, LLC (E.D. Mich. 2024). “27 U.S.C. § 122a(b). In sum, Plaintiff is entitled to the requested injunctive relief under the Enforcement Act.”
Coulombe v. Jolly, 447 F. Supp. 2d 1117 (C.D. Cal. 2006). “Additionally, the Twenty-first Amendment Enforcement Act, 27 U.S.C. § 122a, permits state Attorneys General to file a civil suit in federal court to seek injunctive relief barring interstate shipments of wine if such shipments violate the law of the receiving state.”
— 27 U.S.C. § 122a(a)(2) — 2 cases
Nessel v. Lady Hill LLC (E.D. Mich. 2023). “1 “Intoxicating liquor” is defined as that term is defined in 27 U.S.C. § 122a(a)(2) and includes “alcoholic liquor” as that term is defined in the Michigan Liquor Control Code, Mich.”
Nessel v. Dineen Fam. Vineyards, L.L.C. (W.D. Mich. 2024). “Defendant must immediately and adequately train and educate its directors, officers, managers, agents, members, assigns, and employees that 1 “Intoxicating liquor” is defined as that term is defined in 27 U.S.C. § 122a(a)(2) and includes “alcoholic liquor” as that term is…”
— 27 U.S.C. § 122a(b) — 3 cases
Swedenburg v. Kelly, 232 F. Supp. 2d 135 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). “The Court finds this argument unpersuasive because the Act merely authorizes a state attorney general to enforce state law "regulating the importation or transportation of any intoxicating liquor” in federal court, 27 U.S.C. § 122a(b), and explicitly provides that it “shall not…”
Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Schnorf, 738 F. Supp. 2d 793 (N.D. Ill. 2010). “1885 ; 27 U.S.C. § 122a(b). Defendants do not address this statute or explain why it would be ineffective to exert regulatory control over entities that are not local.”
Nessel v. Bolo Cellars, LLC (E.D. Mich. 2024). “27 U.S.C. § 122a(b). In sum, Plaintiff is entitled to the requested injunctive relief under the Enforcement Act.”
— 27 U.S.C. § 122a(c) — 1 case
Nessel v. Dineen Fam. Vineyards, L.L.C. (W.D. Mich. 2024). “Defendant must immediately and adequately train and educate its directors, officers, managers, agents, members, assigns, and employees that 1 “Intoxicating liquor” is defined as that term is defined in 27 U.S.C. § 122a(a)(2) and includes “alcoholic liquor” as that term is…”
— 27 U.S.C. § 122a(e)(2) — 1 case
Swedenburg v. Kelly, 232 F. Supp. 2d 135 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). “The Court finds this argument unpersuasive because the Act merely authorizes a state attorney general to enforce state law "regulating the importation or transportation of any intoxicating liquor” in federal court, 27 U.S.C. § 122a(b), and explicitly provides that it “shall not…”
— 27 U.S.C. § 122a(e)(l) — 1 case
Bolick v. Roberts, 199 F. Supp. 2d 397 (E.D. Va. 2002). “25,2001; codified at 27 U.S.C. § 122a. The Act creates a civil cause of action to enforce state laws in federal court by way of injunction.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.