The U.S. Supreme Court case Edwards, Governor of Louisiana, et al. v. Healy et al., 1974 revolved around the constitutionality of a Louisiana law that prohibited the sale and importation of alcoholic beverages into the state unless they were first processed through an in-state wholesaler or distributor. The plaintiffs argued that this law violated both the Commerce Clause and Equal Protection Clause under Fourteenth Amendment to United States Constitution by discriminating against out-of-state businesses. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Healy, stating that while states have broad power to regulate liquor under Twenty-first Amendment, it does not supersede other constitutional provisions such as Commerce Clause which prohibits discriminatory treatment towards interstate commerce. In essence, this ruling affirmed that although states may control alcohol within their borders due to Twenty-first Amendment's repeal prohibition provision; they cannot use these powers to discriminate against out-of-state entities thus violating Interstate Commerce clause.

In the dissenting opinion for Edwards, Governor of Louisiana, et al. v. Healy et al., Justice William Rehnquist argued that the Supreme Court should not have taken up this case because it was a political question and thus outside its jurisdiction. He contended that the issue at hand - whether or not Louisiana could ban certain books from its schools - was a matter for state legislatures to decide rather than federal courts. Furthermore, he believed that there were no constitutional violations in this case as the First Amendment does not guarantee an absolute right to access all types of information without any restrictions whatsoever. Therefore, according to him, states should be allowed some leeway in determining what materials are appropriate for their educational institutions.