JazzboCR wrote:
One paragraph in Brother ID's quote caught my eye, the one that said that CBP will enforce more stringent-than-federal state regs. WTF on this (I don't doubt he's quoting correctly). I thought Federal regs always trumped the states--isn't that what the Constitution as interpreted by the SCOTUS * has said? Truly not getting political here (I want to stay in Senior Brother Admin1's good graces) but is this one of those rare cases where the Feds have given it up to the states, instead of of a "my way or the highway" situation? Not a question of choice, like State or Federal charter for a bank--seems like the Feds bent themselves over the car hood here.
* Supreme Court of the US--not to be confused with scrotum.
Actually I would argue that this is a case of the government working as the framers of the Constitution intended it to work. That being that powers not specifically granted to the federal government are powers belonging to the individual states.
In this case each state has the power to adopt their own laws that pertain to alcoholic beverages and CBP is enforcing that law. it is important to note that the law of the state where you enter the U.S. is the one enforced not the state law that is in effect in your state of residence or the state of your final destination.
_________________

Pura Vida

Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four
essential food groups:
alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat.
Alex Levine
