One day after the Sixth Circuit decision held Ohio’s wine retailer shipping law and alcohol transportation restrictions unconstitutional, the petitioners challenging Arizona’s discriminatory wine retailer shipping law filed a Supplemental Brief with the U.S. Supreme Court.

The petition has centered on a growing split among the circuits over how courts should analyze discriminatory alcohol shipping laws after Tennessee Wine. Four circuits have largely treated the three-tier system as shielding states from constitutional scrutiny, while three circuits have required states to present concrete evidence showing the restrictions advance legitimate health and safety interests.

Until now, however, there was no split in result — every circuit had ultimately upheld the challenged laws.

The Sixth Circuit’s decision changed that.

By striking down Ohio’s direct ship restrictions, the Sixth Circuit created a direct conflict not only in methodology, but in outcome. Petitioners are now urging the Supreme Court to take notice before the Justices consider the case at conference on May 12.

The supplemental filing argues the issue has become nationally significant and ripe for Supreme Court review, with courts now reaching incompatible conclusions on the constitutionality of discriminatory retailer shipping laws.