ESG opponents say Vanguard’s settlement docs will prove companies colluded to push climate agenda

The Vanguard Group’s decision to sign an agreement resolving a multistate lawsuit accusing investment firms of colluding to harm the coal industry contains an item that opponents of ESG are very excited about. It could confirm the lawsuit’s accusations — or prove them entirely false. Among other items in its settlement agreement, Vanguard agreed to hand over communications it had with other parties. 
Will Hild, executive director of Consumers’ Research, said in a webinar Friday that the documents Vanguard is going to provide will demonstrate that the asset managers were colluding, as the lawsuit accuses them of doing. 
“For a long time, the defense of these asset managers has been to claim this is some sort of crazy conspiracy theory […] I think we’re about to find out that that is the opposite of the case, and that they were hiding in plain view their activities. And I can’t wait to see what that discovery is going to divulge,” Hild said. 
Blackrock and State Street weren’t part of the settlement and litigation continues against them in the case. BlackRock, Inc. is the world’s largest asset manager, with approximately trillion in assets under management as of 2025. As of December 31, 2025, State Street Corporation (State Street Global Advisors) reported approximately $5.7 trillion in assets under management (AUM).
Brent Webster, first assistant attorney general of Texas, said the coalition that filed the lawsuit plans to “aggressively” litigate against the firms. 
Lawmakers and lawyers push back
During the Biden-era, ESG practices, sometimes referred to as “woke capitalism,” were all the rage in corporate America. Critics of the practice say that investment firms that were adopting ESG policies pursued progressive policies through corporate America, which were often at odds with their fiduciary duties to provide value returns for their clients. 
Since then, a wave of lawsuits and state-level legislation has sought to push back against the practice. 
A coalition of 11 GOP state attorneys general, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, filed a lawsuit in 2024 against BlackRock, State Street Corporation and Vanguard Group — three of the largest asset managers worldwide with nearly $40 trillion combined assets under management — alleging that they conspired to constrict the coal market as part of an ESG-driven climate agenda. 
Blackrock and State Street have long denied they were engaged in any antitrust violations or were out to hurt the coal industry. 
“As we made clear in our earlier motion to dismiss, this case is trying to re-write antitrust law and is based on an absurd theory that coal companies conspired with their shareholders to reduce coal production. Forcing asset managers to divest from coal companies will harm their ability to access capital and invest in their businesses and employees, likely leading to higher energy prices,” Blackrock said in a statement last May. 
As part of the deal Vanguard signed this week, that firm will pay $29.5 million to the states that participated in the lawsuit. Vanguard also agrees to remain a passive shareholder, meaning it won’t direct its portfolio business companies’ strategies through threats of financial consequences. The firm also agrees not to use shareholder proposals to direct companies’ business strategies. 
The agreement also states that Vanguard denies any wrongdoing or illegal conduct, and the settlement agreement does not constitute an admission that the firm violated the law. 
For the whole energy industry 
Texas has little in the way of coal production. In 2024, the state produced 12.3 million short tons of coal. For comparison, Wyoming, which mines approximately 40% of all the coal in the U.S., produced 190.7 million short tons that year. 
Webster explained Friday that Paxton views the protection of the energy industry as a priority for the office. “We don’t have as much coal as others have. It’s not really a big part of the Texas economy. But in general, when these climate-change terrorists target the energy industry, they’re targeting oil, natural gas and coal,” Webster said. 
Webster came to work in the Texas Attorney General’s office in 2020, and he said early on they began to look closely at the Net Zero Banking Alliance and the Net Zero Asset Managers — organizations that coordinated efforts across the financial sector to help advance net-zero emissions policies. The practices were not just bad for the Texas energy industry, Webster said, they were bad for the overall American economy. 
“We noticed that this was very anti-competitive, and it looked like these associations were going to be raising prices and causing price increases for normal citizens,” Webster said. 
The office noticed that these three firms joined together and bought controlling interests in coal companies and, the attorneys general allege in their lawsuit, the firms proceeded to pressure the companies to reduce the production of coal. 
“The cost of coal then shoots up, and they score a big profit using climate change as their reason. But the people that bore the burden of that profit are these normal Americans who were just trying to heat their homes and provide energy for their homes during winters,” Webster said. 
Don’t mess with Texas: “Let’s get into court”
Webster said that he came to the office with a prosecution background, and he took the view that years-long negotiations that avoided litigation weren’t his style. He also said that if he saw that there was a violation of the law and the evidence was there to support it, then the office would pursue litigation. “Let’s just get into court, have some real deadlines, do some real discovery and see what’s happening here,” Webster said. 
He said at first, corporations treated them like a plaintiffs’ outfit and were hesitant to negotiate, fearing other plaintiffs would follow. The AG’s office wasn’t being treated like a state, and they wanted the companies to respond like they would to the Department of Justice. “When we bring cases against you, we’re serious. We have some allegations that we’re going to bring, and we have evidence,” Webster said. 
Over time, companies have started to respond to this approach, and Vanguard signing the settlement agreement is reflective of that, he said. 
“I don’t think that would have happened four years ago, but because we’ve shown this behavior, and we’ve expressed an opportunity to resolve issues early in this litigation, we’re seeing more and more corporations come to us saying, ‘Hey, you sued us, but let’s see if we can work this out.’ If you don’t sue them, they’re not really interested in working it out with you,” Webster said. 
Webster praises Vanguard’s cooperation
Webster gave Vanguard credit for coming to the table and working to find a resolution to the lawsuit. “We were happy with the results, and I will give credit to Vanguard. They were very proactive in wanting to do the right thing here,” Webster said. 
He said that other lawsuits are possible. The Texas Attorney General’s Office is looking into the proxy advisory firms, Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis. 
“I think that the whole industry should take a look at how they’re operating right now. And that’s the only way they can really head off future litigation risk,” Webster said.

Read Full Article: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/esg-opponents-think-clause-vanguards-agreement-will-prove-companies-colluded?utm_source=justthenews.com&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=external-news-aggregators