Opinion ID: 1378013
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Twenty-first Amendment

Text: Town argues its ordinance is valid as an exercise of the State's power to regulate alcohol under the Twenty-first Amendment even if it violates the First Amendment. Section 2 of the Twenty-first Amendment of the United States Constitution provides: The transportation or importation into any state ... for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. While historically this Amendment was construed to sanction the right of a state to control the importation of alcohol unfettered by the Commerce Clause, see Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves, 308 U.S. 132, 60 S.Ct. 163, 84 L.Ed. 128 (1939), the United States Supreme Court has since interpreted it to allow a state to prohibit nude dancing in establishments that sell alcohol despite the fact that nude barroom dancing is protected under the First Amendment. City of Newport v. Iacobucci, 479 U.S. 92, 107 S.Ct. 383, 93 L.Ed.2d 334 (1986); New York State Liquor Authority v. Bellanca, 452 U.S. 714, 101 S.Ct. 2599, 69 L.Ed.2d 357 (1981); California v. LaRue, 409 U.S. 109, 93 S.Ct. 390, 34 L.Ed.2d 342 (1972). [I]n the context of liquor licensing, the Twenty-first Amendment confers broad regulatory powers on the States.... This regulatory authority includes the power to ban nude dancing as part of a liquor license control program. Iacobucci, 479 U.S. at 95, 107 S.Ct. at 385. Further, this power to ban nude barroom dancing may be exercised by a local government where the State has delegated its authority over alcohol. Id.; Fillingim v. Boone, 835 F.2d 1389 (11th Cir.1988) (county could ban nude barroom dancing where state had delegated to county its regulatory powers under the Twenty-first Amendment); Krueger v. City of Pensacola, 759 F.2d 851 (11th Cir.1985) (municipality could not ban nude barroom dancing where state had not delegated its authority under Twenty-first Amendment). Town contends the State has delegated this authority. We disagree. Under S.C.Code Ann. § 61-3-410 (1990), [4] the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission has sole and exclusive power to grant, issue, suspend and revoke all licenses authorizing the sale of alcohol. More importantly, Article VIII-A, § 1, of the South Carolina Constitution explicitly provides: the General Assembly shall not delegate to any municipal corporation the power to issue licenses to sell [alcoholic beverages]. This constitutional provision prevents the State from delegating to Town the power to regulate the sale of alcohol from which the authority to ban nude barroom dancing springs. We find the conclusion inescapable that the State has not delegated to Town its regulatory power under the Twenty-first Amendment. AFFIRMED. CHANDLER, Acting C.J., FINNEY, TOAL, JJ., and BRUCE LITTLEJOHN, Acting Associate Justice, concur.