Can a Mississippi town require a business that only sells beer and light wine to also get an ABC liquor license?

Plain-English summary

The Town of Sardis had an ordinance saying that even if a business held a state Department of Revenue permit to sell beer or light wine for on-premise consumption, the business could not actually sell those drinks at its tables until it also obtained an ABC liquor license under Miss. Code Ann. § 67-1-7. Alderman Price asked whether that local layer was lawful.

The AG concluded it was not. Mississippi's Title 67, Chapter 3 (the beer-and-light-wine chapter) is administered by the Department of Revenue, and it covers manufacture, sale, distribution, possession, and transportation. Because the Legislature occupied that field, a town cannot pile a separate state liquor license on top of the state beer permit as a precondition to selling beer. The opinion identified one carve-out: § 67-3-65 expressly leaves municipalities room to set zones, hours, and other measures aimed at public health, morals, and safety. Whether a particular ordinance fits within that carve-out, the AG said, is a question for a court, not the AG.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2020. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Background and statutory framework

Mississippi handles beer and light wine separately from spirits. Beer and light wine are governed by Title 67, Chapter 3 of the Mississippi Code, with permitting administered by the Department of Revenue under § 67-3-25. Liquor (distilled spirits and "alcoholic beverages" as defined by Title 67, Chapter 1) is regulated by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division and licensed under § 67-1-7. Two separate statutory regimes, two separate state agencies, two separate permits.

The Town of Sardis tried to bridge the two by ordinance, conditioning a beer business's right to serve beer on-premise on its also obtaining an ABC liquor license. The AG framed the legal question as preemption: does state law occupy the field of beer-and-light-wine regulation tightly enough to bar that local add-on?

The opinion's answer turns on two pieces of statutory text. First, Title 67, Chapter 3 vests the Department of Revenue with authority over the manufacture, sale, distribution, possession, and transportation of beer and light wine, and the AG, citing a 1998 opinion to Lee, treats that as a comprehensive grant. Second, § 67-3-65 carves out a defined slice of municipal authority: zoning, opening and closing hours, and other measures advancing public health, morals, and safety. The AG read § 67-3-65 as the only door through which a municipality can layer its own beer rules on top of the state regime. A licensing requirement keyed to a different state permit (the ABC license) does not fit through that door.

The opinion also reminds the reader of a structural point about AG opinions in Mississippi: under § 7-5-25, AG opinions are issued for the future guidance of officials entitled to receive them, and an AG opinion can neither validate nor invalidate past municipal action. So the opinion tells Sardis what is unlawful going forward; it does not unwind any prior denials or enforcement actions.

The opinion stops short of telling Sardis whether the ordinance might survive on a different theory, such as whether a narrower version aimed at hours, zones, or public-safety measures would fit within § 67-3-65. The AG sends that question, and any specific challenge to a specific ordinance, to a court of competent jurisdiction, citing the 2002 Kirk opinion.

Common questions

Q: Does this mean a town can never regulate beer sales at all?
A: No. The opinion specifically preserves municipal authority under § 67-3-65 to set zones and territories, hours of opening and closing, and other public-health/morals/safety rules. What the town cannot do is condition a state beer permit on an unrelated state liquor permit.

Q: If a business already has a state beer permit under § 67-3-25, what else can a town demand?
A: Beyond the § 67-3-65 zoning/hours category, the AG opinion does not list permissible local add-ons. Anything that looks like a parallel licensing scheme runs straight into the preemption analysis the opinion applies to Sardis.

Q: Is selling liquor different from selling beer for this purpose?
A: Yes. Liquor is governed by Title 67, Chapter 1, and licensed by ABC under § 67-1-7. A business that wants to sell distilled spirits on-premise must hold the ABC license regardless of its beer permit. The ordinance issue here was the reverse: requiring the liquor license for a business that only wants to sell beer.

Q: The AG opinion mentions a 1998 Lee opinion and a 2002 Kirk opinion. Are those binding?
A: AG opinions in Mississippi are persuasive authority, not binding precedent. They guide officials entitled to receive them, but a court can disagree. The Lee and Kirk opinions are cited here as the AG's prior thinking on field preemption and on the fact-specific nature of ordinance challenges, respectively.

Q: Does this opinion undo Sardis's past enforcement of the ordinance?
A: No. The AG noted that under § 7-5-25 its opinions are issued for the future guidance of officials and "can neither validate nor invalidate past action of municipal governing authorities." The opinion tells Sardis that the extra-license requirement would be preempted going forward; it does not reach back to undo prior denials.

Citations

• Miss. Code Ann. § 67-1-7 (ABC on-premise consumption license for alcoholic beverages)
• Miss. Code Ann. § 67-3-1 et seq. (beer and light wine regulatory chapter)
• Miss. Code Ann. § 67-3-25 (Department of Revenue beer/light wine permit)
• Miss. Code Ann. § 67-3-65 (preserved municipal authority over zones, hours, and public-safety measures)
• Miss. Code Ann. § 7-5-25 (statutory grant of authority to the Mississippi AG to issue opinions)
• MS AG Op., Lee (October 23, 1998)
• MS AG Op., Kirk (November 8, 2002)

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/M.Price_January-3-2020-Regulation-of-on-premise-consumption-of-beer-and-light-wine.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain, the linked PDF is authoritative.

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

JIM HOOD
ATTORNEY GENERAL

OPINIONS DIVISION

January 3, 2020

The Honorable Michael Price
Alderman at Large
Town of Sardis
Post Office Box 306
Sardis, Mississippi 38666

Re: Regulation of on-premise consumption of beer and light wine

Dear Alderman Price:

Attorney General Jim Hood received your letter of request and assigned it to me for research and reply.

Background

You state that the Town of Sardis has an ordinance that provides that light wine and beer may not be sold for consumption on-premise despite a permit from the state Department of Revenue unless a permit is also obtained from the State ABC Commission for the sale of on-premise consumption of alcoholic beverages (liquor).

Issue Presented

You ask if the Town of Sardis may require a business to get an on-premise consumption ABC Liquor License from the ABC Commission under Section 67-1-7, despite not selling alcoholic beverages, in order to be able to sell beer and light wine for consumption at the same business? In other words, is the only state license required for a business to sell beer and light wine for consumption is one issued under Section 67-3-25? May a town require a license issued under Section 67-1-7 for the sale of beer and light wine in addition to the license issued under Section 67-3-25?

Response

Pursuant to Section 7-5-25 of the Mississippi Code, opinions of the Attorney General are issued on questions of law for the future guidance of those officials entitled to receive them. An Attorney General's opinion can neither validate nor invalidate past action of municipal governing authorities.

As a general rule, municipalities may not regulate activity that has been preempted by state law. With the exception of Section 67-3-65 of the Mississippi Code, the Department of Revenue regulates the manufacture, sale, distribution, possession and transportation of light wine and beer. See Miss. Code Ann. Sections 67-3-1, et seq.; MS AG Op., Lee (October 23, 1998).

The Legislature, in its passage of Section 67-3-65, expressly reserved some limited regulatory power in municipalities. Section 67-3-65, inter alia, authorizes municipalities to enforce such proper rules and regulations for fixing zones and territories, prescribing hours of opening and of closing, and for such other measures as will promote public health, morals, and safety, as may be needed in the premises by such ordinance. An ordinance could include matters similar to those addressed in Section 67-3-25. Whether any such ordinance is reasonable would be a determination for a court of competent jurisdiction. MS AG Op., Kirk (November 8, 2002).

A municipal ordinance requiring commercial establishments holding a valid permit issued by the State Tax Commission for the sale and on-premise consumption of beer and light wine to first obtain a license for on-premise consumption of liquor from the ABC, pursuant to Sections 67-3-1 et seq., would conflict with, and be preempted by, state statute.

Sincerely,

JIM HOOD, ATTORNEY GENERAL

By: Phil Carter
Special Assistant Attorney General

550 HIGH STREET, POST OFFICE BOX 220, JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI 39205-0220
TELEPHONE (601) 359-3680, FACSIMILE (601) 359-5025