Ohio’s liquor laws shaped by 1920s, ’30s

Ohioans can order all manner of products shipped directly to their homes from out of state, such as running shoes, electronics and simple household items. So why not wine and liquor?

Actually, a handful of Ohio consumers told The Dispatch that they’ve ordered spirits from out of state for years with no consequences. But the practice is technically illegal, and Attorney General Dave Yost moved to crack down on out-of-state wine and liquor sellers last week when he filed a request for an injunction in federal court to compel those companies to stop.

Shipping conventional products to Ohio is as simple as putting it in a box and dropping it off at the post office, so why is the direct shipment of wine and liquor to Ohio consumers forbidden?

Laws regulating the sale of spirits in Ohio are the legacy of Prohibition. The 21st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ended the nationwide alcohol ban in 1933, but the amendment’s second clause left the regulation of alcohol sales to the states.

“It’s basically broad granting of authority to the states to regulate alcohol within their borders,” said Jessie Hill, a professor of law at Case Western Reserve

University in Cleveland.

The amendment would seem to be at odds with the Constitution’s “dormant commerce clause,” which bars states from favoring businesses within their borders. Hill said states reconcile that by requiring all companies, both in and out of state, to comply with the same laws. Ohio for example, requires all who sell liquor and wine in the state to have the same type of permit regardless of their location.

Left to their own devices after Prohibition, states created a byzantine patchwork of regulations, experts say.

Automakers are reluctant to halt production again, fearing what it would do to their finances just as they were recovering from the spring shutdown.

Layoffs would also be difficult for workers. The $600-a-week supplement to unemployment insurance authorized by Congress in March, which helped many autoworkers, ends July 31. It is not clear whether lawmakers will extend the benefit.

Shortly after factories reopened in May, some automakers temporarily shut down plants after workers — usually just one or two — tested positive for the coronavirus. No automakers have reported widespread outbreaks like those that have affected meatprocessing plants.

‘‘Since restarting our operations, we have not had any spread of the virus in our plants,’’ said Jodi Tinson, a spokeswoman for Fiat Chrysler. ‘‘Where we have had an employee test positive, social distancing, mandatory use of personal protection equipment, and cleaning and disinfecting have been in full use.’’

Some of the most closely watched plants are in Texas, which has had more than 265,000 cases and has been averaging more than 9,000 new cases recently.

A GM spokesman, Dan Flores, said the company os confident that the many safety measures it has put in place at factories will protect employees.

‘‘People on our team should not be concerned about coming to work,’’ he said. ‘‘All of our facilities are following protocols that are working very well to keep people safe by reducing the possibility that COVID-19 can enter the plants and spread within the plant.’’

GM encourages all employees to wear masks, practice social distancing and wash hands frequently. The company said it eventually will restart a third shift at the Wentzville factory.

Toyota has idled its plants in Texas, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi and Canada this week as part of a planned summer shutdown.