Nowadays we hear all this controversy surrounding the Affordable Care Act, how there are states that are simply refusing to ratify or implement, states that are suing in SCOTUS to not allow it to go into effect, etc. People throw around rhetoric all the time about how it's most grievous regulation in American history, but I can easily remember the Prohibition being characterized in history books in a similar way. That leads me to wonder whether the Prohibition ever saw the same level of government-level backlash that the ACA has. Of course I know about the bootleggers and the speakeasies; I'm wondering about state and local government responses.
The Volstead Act was a federal law that didn't require anything from states and local governments. Enforcement was done by a bureau of the Treasury Department.
That said, there were places (like Baltimore, Chicago, New Orleans, San Francisco, and easily resupplied Detroit) that didn't have much interest in participating in this national experiment, and so stayed "damp" throughout Prohibition. Daniel Okrent's book Last Call and the Ken Burns documentary based on it talk about some of the cities where local coöperation and compliance was less than enthusiastic. This was not usually open defiance for political advantage like the state refusals to set up health care exchanges, though; it was lack of enthusiasm that was often intertwined with actual corruption.