by Kevin Killough
The settlements in these lawsuits filed by left-leaning advocates include provisions that result in ongoing oversight over corporation operations, mandatory training programs and diversity quotas. Companies are required in some cases to fund the reforms, and it all functions as a means to advance liberal policies without involving elected representatives.
Left-wing groups are weaponizing the legal system to advance “woke” policies through the courts, allowing them to bypass legislative processes and create permanent policy changes without democratic input, according to a new study by the Alliance for Consumers.
“Woke activists will stop at nothing to force their political agenda onto the American people. This report shows how a growing network of activist elites and ideological operatives are using lawfare as a weapon to advance divisive, radical policies outside the legislative process,” Will Hild, executive director of Consumers’ Research, said in a statement.
The study, “Lawfare in America,” explains that lawsuits traditionally sought to compensate victims or resolve individual disputes. Now, they’re being increasingly used as policy instruments to advance left-wing causes.
The lawsuits typically target politically unpopular industries, or force companies to adhere to liberal priorities, according to the report. The settlements in these cases consistently include provisions that extend beyond the monetary compensation as they would in traditional litigation. Instead, they result in ongoing oversight over corporation operations, mandatory training programs and diversity quotas.
Reshaping American society through lawfare
The litigation involves climate change, diversity, and ESG issues. O.H. Skinner, executive director of the Alliance for Consumers, told Just the News that liberal causes often involve broad visions of reengineering society.
Whereas the left would want men to be allowed to compete in female sports, decide what type of cars Americans can drive, and suspend the Second Amendment to remove firearms from millions of Americans, Skinner explained, the right tends toward less interference. This is likely why there isn’t an equivalent litigation campaign pushing conservative issues through the courts.
“For the most part, you don't see on the right a massive effort to fundamentally reshape American society,” Skinner said.
The report also says that the lawsuits are also lucrative for the law firms involved. Contingency fee arrangements sometimes generate millions of dollars in attorney's fees, and settlements often require defendants to fund ongoing compliance programs, which provide further revenue streams to consultancy firms and advocacy organizations.
“In short, the financial windfalls produced from woke lawfare feed into the lawsuit machine, fomenting more lawsuits and more liberal outcomes, on top of the policy outcomes directly obtained through settlement agreements or final judgments,” the report states.
Litigation pursues more than compensation
The report provides examples of lawsuits and how these efforts play out in America's courtrooms, and the connections between law firms, Democrats and advocacy groups.
Climate advocacy groups advancing anti-fossil fuel policies are among the most entrenched in America’s courts. San Francisco-based Sher Edling is one of the law firms leading the wave of climate litigation flooding the courts.
In 2023, the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability launched an investigation into the firm, seeking more information on the “wealthy liberals” who are funding the lawsuits “aimed at bankrupting oil and gas companies.”
Sher Edling is representing the City and County of Honolulu in its lawsuit against energy companies, which seeks monetary damages to fund “climate-related infrastructure costs,” and the establishment of “cleanup funds.” The lawsuit also seeks a disgorgement of profits, climate mitigation actions, and corporate disclosure reforms, which illustrates the report’s argument that the litigation pursues oversight and control of industries towards which the left is hostile. Just The News was unable to determine if the firm's action was taken on a pro bono, or instead, a for-profit basis.
Beyond funding law firms that advance the campaign, climate advocacy groups have also been involved with the development of the science that’s to be used in court to prove that oil companies are responsible for damages, a field called “attribution science.”
These groups are then involved in the development of judicial training programs on climate science, which have been accused of providing one-sided perspectives on the issue and ultimately biasing judges in favor of the plaintiffs.
A coalition of 22 state attorneys general recently led a successful effort to remove a chapter from a science manual that’s used by thousands of judges. The chapter dealt with climate science and frequently cited the research of climate advocates and an attorney who is of counsel at Sher Edling.
Beyond climate litigation
The report also highlights multiple cases involving diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and ESG mandates, in addition to climate cases. The law firm Cohen Mistein brought a lawsuit on behalf of the Teamsters Local 272 Labor Management Pension Fund against Google’s parent company, Alphabet. The lawsuit alleged that the company enabled and concealed sexual harassment and discrimination.
The case was settled in 2020 without direct compensation to the plaintiffs. Instead, Google agreed to make a $310 million commitment to internal DEI initiatives, create a DEI advisory council, and overhaul sexual harassment reporting.
According to a previous report by the Alliance for Consumers, 99% of FEC-recorded donations from Cohen Mistein and its employees in 2024 went to Democrats and their allies.
The “Lawfare in America” report argues that the lawsuit functioned as a means for advocacy groups to push a comprehensive expansion of the DEl agenda at one of the nation's biggest companies. This was done all through litigation without any involvement from lawmakers representing constituents’ wishes or shareholder demands.
Reform efforts begin at state level
Skinner said that addressing the problem will most likely begin with state legislation in red states. According to ESG Dive, 106 bills opposing ESG were introduced in state legislatures in 2025, and 11 passed — all of them in red states.
As more legislation takes aim at lawfare, Skinner said, momentum will build and possibly culminate in Congressional action. “I think you're going to start to see more states take steps to rein in this woke trial-lawyer industrial complex. Then, it will build on itself,” Skinner said.
Kevin Killough is the Energy Reporter for Just The News. You can follow him on X for more coverage.
Source: https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/leftist-advancing-climate-policy-dei-and-esg-through-courts-seek-broad
No comments:
Post a Comment