Victor Schwartz standing in a road holding a glass of wine

Alum Took His Case All the Way to the Supreme Court—and Won

Stories You May Like

MBA Alums’ Wine Brand Lets You Raise a (Zero-Proof) Glass

Famed Restaurateur Recalls a Career on the Front Lines of Fine Dining

Like a Fine Vintage, Iconic Wines Class Is Aging Splendidly

Wine importer Victor Owen Schwartz ’80 has made global headlines with his company’s successful battle against tariffs

Editor’s note: This is an update to a previous story on Schwartz’s victory in the Court of International Trade.

By Beth Saulnier

Like generations of Cornell seniors, Victor Owen Schwartz ’80 took Intro to Wines during his final semester on the Hill. But when he was sitting in a packed lecture hall on Friday mornings—learning about grapes, vintages, and terroir from legendary professor Vance Christian ’61, MS ’65—he could never have suspected that 45 years later, he’d become the global face of a Supreme Court case key to the U.S. wine import industry.

Schwartz’s small, family-run firm, VOS Selections, had been the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit that the Liberty Justice Center filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade in mid-April 2025, challenging the sweeping import tariffs instituted by the Trump Administration.

In late May, a three-judge panel ruled unanimously in favor of the plaintiffs—deciding that the tariffs had exceeded the scope of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, under which the administration had instituted them.

The case went to the U.S. Court of Appeals—which again ruled for the plaintiffs, in a 7-4 vote.

The Supreme Court then fast-tracked it, with oral arguments held in November.

In late February 2026, the decision came down: 6-3 in favor of VOS Selections and its fellow plaintiffs.

Victor Schwartz and his daughter, Chloë, standing outside the U.S. Supreme Court.
At the Supreme Court with his daughter, Chloë, with whom he runs VOS Selections.

Throughout the legal process, Schwartz and his company have been thrust into the international spotlight—fielding interview requests from just about every major U.S. newspaper and broadcaster, plus reporters from France, Italy, and beyond.

After the Supreme Court decision, Schwartz even got a visit from New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, who has been calling for billions in tariff refunds for the state’s businesses.

Throughout the legal process, Schwartz and his company have been thrust into the international spotlight—fielding interview requests from just about every major U.S. newspaper and broadcaster, plus reporters from France, Italy, and beyond.

For the Arts & Sciences alum—a former econ major who’s married to a fellow Cornellian, Cushla Naegele ’80—the media attention has been dizzying and unrelenting.

But amid the tumult, Schwartz was gracious enough to make time to speak with Cornellians. The following has been condensed from conversations following both the Court of International Trade and Supreme Court decisions.

First off: how did you celebrate your Supreme Court victory?

We opened a beautiful bottle of French wine, an old vintage of Châteauneuf-du-Pape: Domaine du Banneret, a family I’ve been working with for two generations. I thought that was appropriate and delightful.

You attended the oral arguments in November. What was that like?

It will always be a special point in my life—to not just have been to the Supreme Court, but to have actually been a plaintiff there. It was amazing to have that experience, to be in that room and hear the questions.

I was impressed with how knowledgeable the justices and lawyers were, and the seriousness of the court. This is the ultimate backbone of our country.

I was impressed with how knowledgeable the justices and lawyers were, and the seriousness of the court. This is the ultimate backbone of our country.

Would you explain why tariffs—which are intended to spur domestic industry by raising the costs of imported goods—are so challenging in the realm of wine?

Stories You May Like

MBA Alums’ Wine Brand Lets You Raise a (Zero-Proof) Glass

Famed Restaurateur Recalls a Career on the Front Lines of Fine Dining

Wine is not fungible. You can move a chip factory to Michigan, but you can’t make Champagne in the Napa Valley. Wines—especially the kind we’re interested in—are so specific to place, to culture, to the people there; it’s all tied in.

That’s what makes wine interesting. Otherwise, you’d have one red, one rosé, and one white, and they’d all come out of a tap. What’s so wonderful about wine is the difference.

Could you tell us about your business?

Ours is a small, family company—we’re about 20 people—that we started 40 years ago; first my mom worked with me, and now my 30-year-old daughter. We import from five continents.

We sell wines, spirits, sakes, and alcohol-free products to a lot of lovely restaurants and shops in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and though wholesalers to additional states across the country. Our suppliers are also small, family operations. That’s why this particular issue is so important to me.

Victor Schwartz in a vineyard with his toddler daughter.
In a vineyard with his daughter, then a toddler.

How have the administration’s tariffs impacted your bottom line?

They’ve been super negative. We have to pay them upfront, and cash flow is so important; it’s a business’s circulatory system. Sure, profitability is important—but cash flow keeps the lights on. It’s how you pay your bills.

This is not a high-margin business. And to remove, for European goods, 15%—where are we going to find that money?

We’re going to cut back on the number of products we carry. We’re going to cut back on inventory. We’re not going to expand. It’s been a big period of contraction.

It doesn’t really make sense; you’d think that government is there to help businesses, but this has hindered them. American businesses paid these tariffs. I’ve been screaming that from the mountaintops—and every legitimate economist has said that’s a fact.

Why were you willing not only to participate in this lawsuit, but become the lead plaintiff?

There was really no option. I mean, we’re all sitting around complaining about people not stepping up, and here was an opportunity to do something—to put my money where my mouth is. I knew there were risks involved, but I felt I had to do it.

As these three court wins have rolled out, what kind of responses have you gotten from other businesspeople?

We’ve been receiving messages from all over the country. After the Supreme Court decision, we got over a thousand: “Thank you so much, we appreciate you standing up.”

Of course we get some very nasty stuff, but it’s far outweighed by the positive. And it’s been totally bipartisan.

American businesses paid these tariffs. I’ve been screaming that from the mountaintops—and every legitimate economist has said that’s a fact.

Bipartisan? Really?

Yes—my contention all along has been that this is not political. This was a bad business decision on the part of the administration, and it cuts across political lines.

Lastly: you posted excerpts from Justice Neil Gorsuch’s opinion on your LinkedIn. Besides the obvious of it being in your favor, what do you find most compelling about it?

Basically, that there’s a reason we have a deliberative body. One of the important things about the way our country works is that sometimes the other side is going to be in power. It’s not, “Let me grab as much power as I can while we’re in office, because we’re going to be there forever.”

That’s why we have these laws: so there are limitations on what you can do. This is not a monarchy or an autocracy. You have to follow the laws, and they’re there to help everybody. Just be thankful that they exist.

(All photos provided.)

Published March 4, 2026

Comments

  1. Gary Brandt, Class of 1974
    6 Mar, 2026

    Great article, will be sharing with friends in the wine business

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Once your comment is approved, your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Other stories You may like