Two months ago, I wrote on Damien Schiff, a nominee for the Court of Federal Claims (CFC). Specifically, I called out Schiff’s youth, noting that he was only 38, and had spent less than thirteen years in practice. Steven S. Schwartz, Trump’s second nominee for the CFC, has even less experience, having been out of law school for less than ten years.
Stephen S. Schwartz received a B.A. with Distinction from Yale University in 2005, and immediately proceeded to the University of Chicago Law School, graduating with a J.D. in 2008. After graduating, Schwartz clerked for conservative Judge Jerry Edwin Smith on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
After his clerkship, Schwartz joined the Washington D.C. Office of Kirkland and Ellis as a litigation associate. After five years there, Schwartz was hired as Counsel at Cause of Action, a public interest law firm focused on FOIA and administrative law suits against the federal government.
In November 2016, Schwartz left Cause of Action to become a partner at Schaerr Duncan LLP., a D.C> Boutique Litigation firm, that, among other matters, represented Sen. Ted Cruz in the challenge to his eligibility to run for president.
History of the Seat
Schwartz has been nominated for a seat on the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (CFC), an Article I court that hears monetary claims against the federal government. Judges are appointed for 15-year terms. The seat Schiff was nominated for opened up on October 21, 2013, with Judge Lynn Bush’s move to senior status. On April 10, 2014, Thomas Halkowski, a Principal in the Delaware office of Fish & Richardson, P.C. was nominated for the vacancy by President Obama. Halkowski and four other nominees to the Court were approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously. However, the nominations were blocked by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), who argued that the CFC did not need any more judges. Despite rebuttals from federal claims attorneys and Chief Judge Patricia Campbell-Smith, Cotton maintained his blockade, and the Obama Administration was unable to fill any vacancies on the Court, leaving six of the sixteen judgeships vacant.
From 2009 to 2015, Schwartz served as a litigation associate at Kirkland & Ellis. In this capacity, Schwartz represented large companies in trials and appeals in federal court. For example, Schwartz was part of the legal team for UBS Securities LLC in a case involving alleged violations of the Georgia Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Schwartz also joined noted advocate Christopher Landau in an unsuccessful appeal of a jury award against Avis Budget Group Inc.
In 2015, Schwartz moved to Cause of Action, challenging agency determinations that he considered abuses of discretion. During the transition, Schwartz was part of the legal team challenging FDA interpretations of exclusivity rights on behalf of pharmaceutical companies. He also represented a franchise charged with wage and hour violations by the Department of Labor.
Like Damien Schiff before him, Schwartz comes from a background of legal resistance to agency determinations. However, unlike Schiff, Schwartz does not have a long record of inflammatory blog posts. As such, it is unlikely that Schwartz’s nomination will attract the same intensity of opposition that Schiff has. If opposition gathers, it will be based on his youth and inexperience, rather than his political opinions.
 Martindale-Hubbel Profile, Stephen S. Schwartz, https://www.martindale.com/washington/district-of-columbia/stephen-s-schwartz-43943723-a/.
 Jordain Carney, Cotton Blocks Senate From Approving Federal Claims Judges, The Hill, July 14, 2015, http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/247934-cotton-blocks-senate-from-approving-federal-claims-judges.
 Daniel Wilson, Claims Court a Quiet Victim of Senate Nomination Deadlock, Law360, July 18, 2016, https://www.law360.com/articles/817931/claims-court-a-quiet-victim-of-senate-nomination-deadlock.
 See Raser Tech. Inc. v. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189209 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 30, 2012).
 Alaska Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., 709 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2013).
 Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Admin., 23 F. Supp. 3d 631 (N.D.W.V. 2014), rev’d, 594 Fed. Appx. 791 (4th Cir. 2014).
 Rhea Lana, Inc. & Rhea Lana’s Franchise Systems Inc. v. Dep’t of Labor, 824 F.3d 1023 (D.C. Cir. 2016).