OK for New Mexico to Deny US Airways' Liquor License

[MrFSS]

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A federal judge has ruled New Mexico officials can keep US Airways from serving alcohol on its New Mexico flights after a passenger caused a drunken-driving crash that killed five people.

Full Story

 

[gswager]

Ironically that NM is one of the worst DWI (or DUI) records in the nation. I believe USAirways continued serving two drunken passengers in less than a year on a separate occasion and caused too much trouble on NM highways.

 

[jis]

As I recall there was a time when no alcoholic beverages could be served aboard the Amtrak San Francisco Zephyr while it trundled through Utah.

 

[AlanB]

I'm not sure about two, but what is silly about this one case is that the airline is being punished, even though the man in question got off the plane, drove to a local bar for more drinks, and then got back behind the wheel again and caused the accident, IIRC.

As for how this might affect Amtrak, there are several differences that could play a role here. One, not everyone gets off the train in NM, like a plane. Two, Amtrak is a Federal entity unlike the airline, so Federal rules could come into play here that did not apply to US Air. Three, New Mexico would have no legal standing to stop Amtrak from selling someone a drink at the AZ border, that the passenger then consumes as the train proceeds across NM, prior to disembarking.

 

[DET63]

Does Amtrak go through any Indian Reservations that are "dry"? If so, is it prohibited from serving alcoholic beverages there, or do the restrictions not apply since presumably nobody is going to disembark in the "dry" area? (Or are there station stops in "dry" locations?)

 

[tp49]

I'm not sure about two, but what is silly about this one case is that the airline is being punished, even though the man in question got off the plane, drove to a local bar for more drinks, and then got back behind the wheel again and caused the accident, IIRC.
As for how this might affect Amtrak, there are several differences that could play a role here. One, not everyone gets off the train in NM, like a plane. Two, Amtrak is a Federal entity unlike the airline, so Federal rules could come into play here that did not apply to US Air. Three, New Mexico would have no legal standing to stop Amtrak from selling someone a drink at the AZ border, that the passenger then consumes as the train proceeds across NM, prior to disembarking.

Issue's already been decided and was back in 1973. In the opinion to the US Airways case the court mentions Amtrak and how federal courts have decided on this issue. The discussion begins at the bottom of page 14 and ends on page 16. The issue reached the US Supreme Court who affirmed without opinion a ruling of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled as the Federal District Court in New Mexico did in the US Airways case. The entirety of the US Airways decision can be found here.

 

[rrdude]

I'm not sure about two, but what is silly about this one case is that the airline is being punished, even though the man in question got off the plane, drove to a local bar for more drinks, and then got back behind the wheel again and caused the accident, IIRC.
As for how this might affect Amtrak, there are several differences that could play a role here. One, not everyone gets off the train in NM, like a plane. Two, Amtrak is a Federal entity unlike the airline, so Federal rules could come into play here that did not apply to US Air. Three, New Mexico would have no legal standing to stop Amtrak from selling someone a drink at the AZ border, that the passenger then consumes as the train proceeds across NM, prior to disembarking.

Issue's already been decided and was back in 1973. In the opinion to the US Airways case the court mentions Amtrak and how federal courts have decided on this issue. The discussion begins at the bottom of page 14 and ends on page 16. The issue reached the US Supreme Court who affirmed without opinion a ruling of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled as the Federal District Court in New Mexico did in the US Airways case. The entirety of the US Airways decision can be found here.

Dunno 'bout the "law", but back in 77-81, while on Amtrak, there WERE certain areas, I think it was in Oklahoma, where the bar shut down. We were told they were dry counties......

 

[Rumpled]

We used to take Greyhound charters from OC to colorado to ski. Sometimes the alcohol had to be stowed below and not consumed going thru Utah. Seemed to vary on the driver, the ones that did it claimed Utah law. We didn't really care why, just wanted Utah to be over.

 

[tp49]

Dunno 'bout the "law", but back in 77-81, while on Amtrak, there WERE certain areas, I think it was in Oklahoma, where the bar shut down. We were told they were dry counties......

It may very well still be the case. There is a second case quoted in the opinion that came after the initial 1972/73 case that was a challenge to Oklahoma law on the subject the first case came out of Kansas. Amtrak lost that challenge too.

 

[DET63]

We used to take Greyhound charters from OC to colorado to ski. Sometimes the alcohol had to be stowed below and not consumed going thru Utah. Seemed to vary on the driver, the ones that did it claimed Utah law. We didn't really care why, just wanted Utah to be over.

I thought consumption of intoxicants was always prohibited on Greyhound. Whether that was company policy or federal or state law, or whether it applied to charters as well as to scheduled services, I do not know. I just remember seeing the signs they used to have at the front of the bus telling where you could or couldn't smoke, to not talk to the driver while the coach was in motion, etc.