Despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling Monday, striking down laws prohibiting Internet and mail-order purchases of wine, you'll still have to buy your favorite Chardonnay or Merlot at a state liquor store - and pay a hefty markup.

The high court declared unconstitutional laws in Michigan and New York that ban out-of-state wine makers from shipping directly to customers.

''If a state chooses to allow direct shipment of wine, it must do so on evenhanded terms,'' said Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing the majority opinion in the 5-4 vote.

And that's why Utah is unlikely to be impacted by the decision. Its restrictions are not discriminatory, applying to all purveyors of wine.

"We've never allowed in- or out-of-state shipments of alcohol beverages, which places us on a level playing field," said Thom Roberts, state assistant attorney general. So ''the short answer is no, Utah laws have not been rendered unconstitutional."

Michigan's law, by contrast, granted licenses only for in-state wineries to ship directly to customers in Michigan.

New York's law was comparable, with an exception that allowed licenses to be granted to out-of-state wineries that opened a branch office and warehouse in New York.

While the court's decision directly impacted only those two states' laws, similar out-of-state purchase restrictions in 22 other states have been called into question as a result.

The Supreme Court's split decision was as contentious as lower-court rulings on the issue. Previously, the New-York based 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the New York law, while the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit threw out Michigan's law.

Joining Kennedy in the majority were Justices Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer. Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Clarence Thomas and John Paul Stevens dissented.

"Today, many Americans, particularly those members of the younger generations who make policy decisions, regard alcohol as an ordinary article of commerce," wrote Stevens, "subject to substantially the same market and legal controls as other consumer products."

The high court ruled that the Constitution's ban on states' discriminating against interstate commerce must not be overruled by the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition in 1933.

Utah was the 36th - and final - state that voted to pass that amendment.

Today, one holdover from the days of Prohibition is Utah's control over beer containing 3.2 percent alcohol and lighter beer, which is taxed much less than its heavier counterpart.

"A popular myth had it that lighter beer was nonintoxicating," said Brett Clifford, Utah's wine coordinator. "From that 1930s standard, we are still taxing heavier beer the same way we do beverages that come from wineries and distilleries."

The state markup is 84.1 percent for heavy beer, spirits and wine from all vineyards, including Utah's six wineries.

In the 1980s, Utah legislators gave small wineries a break, reducing the state markup by nearly 34.5 percent. That law applies to both in- and out-of-state wineries, hence the apparent exemption from Monday's ruling.

"It's a little-known secret that makes retail prices from small wineries competitive here," said Clifford. "You can buy some wines cheaper in Utah than anywhere else in the country."

Still, drinkers must purchase heavy beer, spirits and wine from state liquor stores or package agencies, such as those at hotels.

But there are a couple of exceptions.

U.S. Customs laws allow Americans to bring up to 2 liters of alcohol into the country upon returning from a foreign land.

In addition, people moving to Utah may obtain a one-time state exemption to import personal wine collections. Newcomers must apply to the Utah Alcohol Beverage Control Department for the exemption.

dawn@sltrib.com