When plans were announced to raise the nation’s tariff rates to levels not seen in nearly a century, the response from most corporate leaders was silence. Fearing that opposing the president’s signature economic policy could prove more costly than the policies themselves, multinational corporations with billions in revenue at stake chose to stand still.
But Victor Schwartz, the owner of a small New York-based wine importer called VOS Selections, took a giant step forward. He became the public face of the legal challenge to overturn the sweeping tariffs—and he won. The Supreme Court decided the case in his favor, ruling that the tariffs were an illegal use of presidential power.
Schwartz admitted he was initially hesitant to take on such a prominent role. “It was one thing to join the case, but then to be the lead plaintiff really gave me pause,” he said. His involvement began after a family member connected him with a libertarian-leaning public-interest law firm that was preparing a challenge. After speaking with many other small businesses, the firm selected Schwartz to lead the case, which was filed as VOS Selections, Inc. v. Trump.
With large corporations largely on the sidelines, Schwartz said he felt like the “last line of defense” against tariffs he viewed as a grave violation of executive power and a direct threat to his family-run business.
His victory, however, came at a personal cost. “I am under constant attack through text, email and I can’t stop it,” Schwartz revealed. “It’s a little ugly. I guess it could be uglier. We keep our doors locked at the office.”
Schwartz’s business imports wine and spirits from 16 countries, making him deeply familiar with the complex tariff code. He explained the difficult position small importers were in. “We can’t just raise our prices, and we just can’t pay it, unlike big companies that can just write a check,” he said. Since the tariffs took effect, he estimates he has paid at least a six-figure sum in fees.
The court’s decision could mean Schwartz and other importers are due hefty refunds, potentially totaling over $134 billion according to customs revenue data. However, the exact process for reclaiming these funds remains unclear.
While the ruling struck down the broad emergency tariffs, it does not prevent the administration from imposing other, more targeted tariffs under different trade laws. The president signed a separate 10% global tariff on the same day the Supreme Court issued its verdict. Schwartz expressed concern about these new measures but noted they would be much more restricted in scope and have time limits.
The risk of challenging the world’s most powerful person was not lost on Schwartz. “We try to tamp down our fear but still recognize the challenges of what’s out there,” he said. His case illustrates that even large corporations have faced backlash for merely pointing out the costs of such policies, making his small business’s legal victory all the more significant.
