In a lengthy dissent, Justice Thomas argued that the plain meaning of Section2 removed "any doubt regarding its broad scope, the Amendment simplified the language of the Webb-Kenyon Act and made it clear that States could regulate importation destined for in-state delivery free of negative Commerce Clause restraints". In his historical account, Justice Thomas argued the early precedent provided by "State Board of Equalization v. Young's Market Co." was indeed correct, and furthered the original intent of the Twenty-first Amendment to provide a constitutional guarantee authorizing state regulation that might conflict with the Dormant Commerce Clause (similar to the Webb–Kenyon Act).