The state filed the final reply brief yesterday (links to all the briefs below).
For those of you looking for a quick refresher (on this case we’ve been following since 2016), this is the second appeal in this matter where a group of broadcasters, along with a bar, and a grape farmer brought a First Amendment challenge to Missouri’s prohibitions on truthful alcohol advertising.They argued that Missouri’s laws and regs restrict the manner and methods and truthful content of their alcohol advertising.
A federal district court recently agreed with the plaintiffs, after a full trial, and entered a decision finding the two alcohol advertising laws and a tied-house provision of Missouri’s liquor laws violated the First Amendment rights of the plaintiffs. In doing so, the court held that the laws failed to advance Missouri’s alleged interests in dissuading over-consumption, reducing underage drinking, and maintaining an orderly marketplace. Specifically, in ruling against Missouri, the court found that based on the evidence, advertising bans don’t reduce consumption, nor do they provide a discernable reduction in underage consumption, and that prohibiting certain advertising like price disclosures from occurring outside (or off premises) of retailers but not inside the same retailer was inconsistent.
The order overturning the regulations and the statute was so important and its ruling so transformative that the Missouri Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control even issued emergency amendments to their regulations to come into compliance with the holding of the district court’s ruling.
We’ve been following the different arguments, (here’s our post on the initial briefs challenging the district court’s ruling on the alcohol advertising restrictions ) and will be posting later on the noteworthy assertions made in these briefs, but wanted to get copies to you, dear reader. Enjoy:
- Here is the Brief of the Appellant – The State of Missouri.
- Here is the Addendum to the Brief of the Appellant – The State of Missouri.
- Here is the Amicus Brief in in support of the State of Missouri – filed by the National Beer Wholesalers Association and others.
- Here is the Brief of the Appellee, the Broadcasters and others who challenged the alcohol advertising regulations and statute and won.
- Here is the Addendum to the Brief of the Broadcasters and others.
- Here is the Amicus Brief filed by the ACLU and the Cato Institute in favor of affirming the district court’s determination that the statute and regulations governing certain alcohol advertising restrictions were unconstitutional and violated the First Amendment.
- Here is the Amicus Brief filed in favor of the Broadcasters and affirmance by the Washington Institute and the Show-Me Institute.
- Here is the final brief, the Reply brief filed by the State of Missouri.