21 State AGs Warn 53 Banks Against Adopting the ESG Scoring Systems

A group of 21 state attorneys general (AG) have written a letter to 53 of the largest asset management firms in the US warning them that they may breach their legal responsibilities to their clients if they proceed with ESG (environmental, social and governance) investment schemes.

The letter, organised by Republican Attorneys General Austin Knudsen (R-Mont.), Jeff Landry (R-La.), and Sean Reyes (R-Utah), accuses asset management firms of ignoring their legal duty to their clients by following ESG-based investment practices. The warning was signed by Republican attorneys general for Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

The letter states, “We are writing this open letter to asset manager industry participants to raise our concerns about the ongoing agreements between asset managers to use Americans’ savings to push political goals during the upcoming proxy season.”

The 21 attorneys general have accused ESG scoring of violating the fiduciary duty to customers and a firm’s representations to consumers regarding the services they offer and compliance with antitrust laws.

Focusing On Environmental Goals Over Financial Benefits Is ‘Unrealistic’

The AGs’ letter specifically points out that firms have signed up to the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative (NZAM) and Climate Action 100+, both of which aim to reduce their managed assets’ carbon emissions to zero by 2050. The letter argues that asset management firms should not place completing “aspirational, unrealistic” environmental goals, e.g., those outlined in the Paris Climate Agreement, above their primary obligation to provide financial benefit to their clients. The AGs cited a recent United Nations report stating that the international community is unlikely to meet the Paris goals, with no clear pathway to 1.5°C global warming.

“None of this is financially justifiable,” the AGs said of the environmental goals outlined in varied ESG frameworks. “Instead, it is a clear attempt to push policies through the financial system that cannot be implemented through the ballot box.”

Knudsen told Fox News that certain ESG goals would harm Montana residents, who rely on the fossil fuel market to keep warm. “We’ve got a million people to keep warm. So, we have to have reliable energy,” Knudsen noted. “And Montana is an energy-producing state. We do produce oil, we do produce natural gas, and we do produce some of the highest quality coal in the world.”

ESG Pushes Race, Gender, and Political Goals

The AGs’ letter also cautions that ESG programmes increasingly encourage firms to take specific political positions, such as supporting access to abortion and imposing gender and race-based diversity quotas.

The letter also cites examples of ESG supporters advocating for specific firms to cease supporting politicians and political groups that have championed legislation limiting abortions or other policies that have “anti-LGBTQ+ voting records.” At least one ESG supporter referred to political donations that it argued were “misaligned” with stated company values and linked to examples of corporate contributions to lawmakers who supported legislation prohibiting transgender individuals from competing in sports for their gender identity.