Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
State attorneys general appeal challenge to labor department’s ESG rule (2023)
| Environmental, social, and corporate governance |
|---|
|
| • 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 |
The state attorneys general who sued the Biden administration to overturn its rule allowing ESG considerations in Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)-governed pension plans filed an appeal on October 26. The case was previously thrown out in a federal district court:
| “ |
A group of Republican-led U.S. states on Thursday said they would appeal a Texas-based federal judge's decision rejecting their challenge to a rule from President Joe Biden's administration allowing employee retirement plans to consider environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues in investment decisions. The 26 states, led by Texas and Utah, filed a notice of appeal in federal court in Amarillo. U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk threw out their lawsuit on Sept. 21. Oil drilling company Liberty Energy Inc (LBRT.N) and an oil and gas trade group are also plaintiffs in the case and joined in the appeal. … "Our coalition was deeply disappointed in the court’s ruling," Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes said in a statement. The rule clearly exceeded the government's authority, Reyes said. "We look forward to our appeal prevailing." The appeal goes to the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is considered one of the most conservative federal appeals courts and has 12 judges appointed by Republican presidents out of a total of 16. … The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, called ERISA, requires retirement plan administrators to act solely in the interest of participants in the plan. The states in their lawsuit claim the rule violates ERISA by allowing these plans to consider non-financial factors. The states have said the rule endangers the retirement savings of millions of Americans and will deplete state tax revenue. Kacsmaryk in his decision upholding the rule said it still requires financial factors to come first and does not require or even encourage retirement plans to consider other factors such as climate change and social and labor issues.[1] |
” |
See also
- Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG)
- Economy and Society: Ballotpedia's ESG newsletter
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
