This Giving Tuesday, help ensure voters have the information they need to make confident, informed decisions. Donate now!

House Judiciary Committee subpoenas Vanguard and Arjuna Capital (2023)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
ESG - Teal - D2.jpg
Environmental, social, and corporate governance
ESG Icon 200x200.png

What is ESG?
Enacted ESG legislation
Arguments for and against ESG
Opposition to ESG
Federal ESG rules
ESG legislation tracker
Economy and Society: Ballotpedia's weekly ESG newsletter
See also: Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG)

December 12, 2023

As part of its ongoing investigation into ESG and antitrust compliance, the House Judiciary Committee on December 11 issued subpoenas to Vanguard (the second-largest asset management company in the world and the largest passive manager) and Arjuna Capital. Influence Watch describes Arjuna as a “left-of-center investment firm based in Durham, North Carolina that specializes in activist investment strategies in environmentalist and social justice causes.” According to the committee, the two firms have not provided adequate responses to previous inquiries:

The Judiciary Committee wants documents and communications from the investment firms related to how they “advance ESG policies,” according to letters from committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.

In each of the letters, Jordan wrote that the firm, “appears to have entered into collusive agreements to ‘decarbonize’ its assets under management and reduce emissions to net zero in ways that may violate U.S. antitrust law.”

Arjuna is part of Climate Action 100+, a coalition of about 700 global investors that represent more than $68 trillion in assets, according to the group. Arjuna also participates in the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative. Vanguard was in the initiative but left in December 2022, but that didn’t stop the committee from including it in its investigation.[1]

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.