When it became public a few weeks ago that the SEC had disbanded its Climate and ESG Task Force, the SEC emphasized that it was not taking its eye off of ESG-related issues. In the latest example of the SEC’s continuing ESG-related monitoring, late last week the ESG announced that it had settled charges against investment adviser Invesco Advisers. The agency alleged that the company had made misleading statements about the percentage of company-wide assets under management that integrated ESG factors in investment decisions. In settling the charges, the company agreed to pay a $17.5 million civil penalty. The SEC’s November 8, 2024, press release about the charges and the settlement can be found here. The SEC’s November 8, 2024, cease-and-desist order in the matter can be found here.

Continue Reading SEC Charges Investment Adviser With ESG-Related Misleading Statements

With the news broke within the last few weeks that months earlier the SEC had quietly disbanded its Climate and ESG task force, the agency took pains to emphasize that the winding up of the Task Force did not mean that the agency was no longer policing ESG-related issues. At least one recent development underscores the fact that the agency is continuing to monitor ESG concerns, particularly “greenwashing”-type concerns. Earlier this week, the agency initiated entered an agreed cease-and-desist order against investment adviser WisdomTree Asset Management, based on alleged misstatements and compliance failures relating to the firm’s execution of its ESG investment strategy. Among other things, the agency alleged that the firm’s funds invested in the investment classes it had said it would avoid.

Continue Reading SEC Charges Investment Adviser With Failing to Adhere to Stated ESG Investment Criteria

In March 2021, to great fanfare, the SEC announced its formation of a Climate and ESG Task Force to “develop initiatives to proactively identify ESG-related misconduct,” as well as to “coordinate the effective use of Division resources, including through the use of sophisticated data analysis to mine and assess information across registrants, to identify potential violations.” Now, it turns out that, much more quietly, the agency has disbanded the Task Force. As first reported in a September 12, 2024, Bloomberg article (here), the SEC shut down the Task Force “within the past few months.”

Continue Reading SEC Disbands Climate and ESG Task Force

In recent months, much of the discussion of ESG issues has focused on the impact of the ESG backlash.  However, the predominance of the backlash movement in the current ESG discussion does not mean that interest in addressing ESG-related concerns has disappeared; in certain circles at least, ESG concerns remain on the agenda. The most interesting recent development along these lines is the May 9, 2024, issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) by the Michigan Department of Attorney General, in which the Department has solicited attorneys to act as Special Assistant Attorneys General (SAAG) to pursue climate change-related lawsuits against fossil fuel companies and others. The Department’s notice is reminder that for all of the noise surrounding the ESG backlash, the threat of ESG-related litigation is continuing.

Continue Reading Michigan AG Solicits Attorney Help for Climate Change Litigation

There is no doubt that, as I have previously noted on this site, the conversation about ESG has changed over time, particularly as ESG has faced a political backlash. These changes not only concern ESG itself but each of its three constituent pillars – and while ESG discussions frequently focus on the “E” pillar, and in particular on climate change, the changes in the ESG conversation also concern the “S” pillar as well. Of the recent changes surrounding the Social component of ESG, arguably none is more important that the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, in which the Court ruled that race-based policies should not be used in university admissions. In a May 23, 2024, Law360 article entitled “The State of Play in DEI and ESG One Year After Harvard Ruling” (here), attorneys from the Crowell & Moring law firm review the ways that the Supreme Court’s decision in the Harvard case have changed the dialog surrounding Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) and ESG.

Continue Reading ESG, DEI, and the Supreme Court’s College Admissions Decision

There is no doubt that ESG both as a concept and as a social, political, and litigation phenomenon has changed over time. Due to political backlash and changing investor priorities, ESG and ESG-related issues recently have featured less prominently in general economic and business dialog than even just a short time ago. An interesting and thought-provoking May 2, 2024, article (here) from the Rock Center for Corporate Governance asks the question whether the circumstances surrounding ESG are changing because ESG “is a luxury good”? (Hat Tip to Cydney Posner’s May 13, 2024, post on the Cooley law firm PubCo blog, here). The article raises some interesting questions and reflects interesting data and observations.

Continue Reading Is ESG a “Luxury Good”?

As ESG-related litigation has developed, one definitive trend has been the emergence of litigation involving allegations of “greenwashing” – that is, claims alleging that companies overstated their ESG credentials in order to win business, attract customers, or score virtue points. To date, the greenwashing claims have emerged primarily in the U.S. and Europe. Now, Australia is getting into the act, as the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has brought and won its first greenwashing civil penalty action. As discussed below, the action involved claims that Vanguard’s Australian affiliate made misleading statements about its ESG-sorting processes for one of its index funds.

Continue Reading Australian Regulator Wins First Greenwashing Enforcement Action

I have noted in prior posts on this site the phenomenon of ESG backlash, which has not only taken the form of legislative and other overtly pollical action, but has also taken the form of litigation as well. Though the ESG backlash lawsuits generally have not fared well in the courts, one of these suits recently survived a motion to dismiss.

In a February 21, 2024, ruling, the Northern District of Texas denied the motion to dismiss in a lawsuit filed by an American Airlines pilot alleging that the airline and its employee benefits committee violated their fiduciary duties under ERISA to the company’s 401(k) plan participants in connection with selection and retention of funds whose managers allegedly pursue non-economic ESG objectives rather than maximizing plan participants’ financial benefits. As discussed below, the ruling underscores just how fraught the ESG-related litigation picture has become. A copy of the court’s ruling can be found here.

Continue Reading ESG Backlash ERISA Lawsuit Survives Dismissal Motion

It is not news that ESG has become a battleground issue, with prominent ESG efforts now facing an anti-ESG backlash. And while in the recent past institutional investors and advocacy groups tried to push publicly traded companies to establish their ESG credentials, the ESG-related litigation (such as it has been, so far at least) has primarily been filed not against ESG laggards, but rather against companies that have tried to promote their sustainability efforts and other climate-friendly measures.

In the latest example of litigation against a company in connection with its efforts to promote its ESG qualifications, the New York Attorney General, Letitia James has filed a fraud lawsuit in New York state court against the U.S. subsidiary of JBS, a Brazil-based meat and poultry producer, alleging that its sustainability claims and its publicized goal of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 misled consumers.  A copy of the New York Attorney General’s February 28, 2024, press release about the lawsuit can be found here. The NYAG’s February 28, 2024, complaint can be found here.

Continue Reading NYAG Sues Meat Company for Its Net Zero Emissions Claims

As I have noted in prior posts, due to a political “backlash” against ESG, many companies have found it expedient to avoid talking about ESG altogether – a developing that has been referred to as “greenhushing.” Indeed, some academics have even suggested that it may be time to say “RIP” to ESG. But if the expression “ESG” is now verboten, how are we going to talk collectively about the various topics encompassed by the term “ESG”?

According to a January 10, 2024, front-page Wall Street Journal article entitled “The Latest Dirty Word in Corporate America: ESG” (here), as “ESG” has become the three letters that corporate officials dare not utter, they have found other ways to talk about “responsible business.” Meanwhile, corporate environmental and social responsibility efforts continue despite the apparent banishment of “ESG” as an expression. Moreover, as also discussed below, due to regulatory changes, the likelihood is that discussion of the concepts underlying what was referred to in past as “ESG” are only going to increase, regardless whether or not the term “ESG” is used.

Continue Reading Goodbye ESG, Hello “Responsible Business”