Georgia Law Review

Beer consumption in the United States is a $100 billion annual industry and is composed of five different kinds of drinks: domestic beer, imported beer, craft beer, hard ciders, and flavored malt beverages. Brewing goliaths Anheuser-Busch InBev and SABMiller dominate the American beer industry, comprising over 75% of the market. While the domestic-beer category comprises the largest segment of the beer market, most of the top domestic brands have experienced a reduction in sales in recent years. Some of the reduction in sales has been attributed to consumers’ desire for more flavorful beer. Consequently, many consumers are turning to craft beer.

Reasoned opinions count as much or more than outcomes, partly because “reasoned response to reasoned argument is an essential aspect of [the judicial] process,” and partly because “the opinion has as one if not its major office to show how like cases are properly to be decided in the future.” Scrutiny of the Supreme Court’s reasons is called for not only when the result seems doubtful, but also when the result is intuitively appealing. Weak reasons may in the long run undermine a holding that deserves a better foundation than the Court has built for it, or at least distort and delay the elaboration of doctrine. When the intuition behind the holding deserves broader application than the Court’s reasons can support, an effort to identify more convincing reasons is an especially worthwhile project.

Heffernan v. City of Paterson, illustrates the good result/weak reasons problem.

In Winnifred Bell v. City of Winter Park, Florida, No. 13-11499 (Mar. 20, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit decided whether the City of Winter Park’s Ordinance No. 2886-12, which generally prohibits targeted picketing within fifty feet of a residential dwelling, is an unconstitutional infringement on First Amendment freedom of speech. Comparing § 62-79 of the ordinance […]