Okay, guess that should read "Wine Connoisseurs," or "Oenophiles" as the Supremes did not rule that food stamps could now be used to purchase Thunderbird, Cisco or Night Train. Instead, they ruled that states like New York, Massachusetts and Michigan could not prohibit direct sales of wines from other states if they allowed such sales for local wineries. You can read coverage in the Chron, the Times, the Globe or the Freep.

Before the ruling, if Gothamist wanted to purchase a bottle of delicious 1999 Carneros Estate Reserve Pinot Noir from Roche Winery (like we had on a recent weekend getaway), they would have to do it from a retail store that received shipments from a wholesale distributor. Now they can order wines directly from the producer, which should be a boon to boutique wineries who couldn't produce vintages in the volume that a national wholesaler might demand. It will also be sweet music to the ears of San Francisco's Wine.com, as they now have more than double the number of potential customers nationwide who can legally receive direct shipments.

Of course, prepare yourselves for a new round of media hype about minors using the web and mail order to get drunk, though SFist would like to point out that when we were 18, we sure as hell weren't debating whether or not our box of chardonnay was over-oaked. After the jump, we asked SFist Derrick what he thought about the ruling and what changes it might create in the wine market.

Uncredited AP photo via the Boston Globe.