Insights on Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG)

In recent years, environmental nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and local governments have increasingly sued gas, oil, and energy companies, challenging their historic messaging on climate change, plastic recycling, and fossil fuels effects.

On April 22, the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order (EO) directing the US Department of Justice (DOJ) to begin to unwind “disparate impact” regulations that were established under federal civil rights laws. In the environmental context, the EO likely represents the functional end of some Biden Administration environmental justice (EJ) efforts.

President Trump’s energy-focused ambitions will generate work for regulators at all levels of the government.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is planning a major reorganization of the Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) that includes consolidating several sections within the division into other DOJ divisions, as well as eliminating field offices.

Right now, much about the world is uncertain. Risks posed by political changes dominate the headlines and also weigh heavily on many decisions made by businesses, their advisors, and their stakeholders.

Right now, much about the world is uncertain. Risks posed by political changes dominate the headlines and also weigh heavily on many decisions made by corporations, their advisors, and their stakeholders.

The full scope of the Trump Administration’s deregulatory efforts in the environmental space was recently made clear with a series of announcements from US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin.

For the last several years, consumer class actions targeting “greenwashing” have become increasingly common. In 2024, Lululemon Athletica Inc. and Lululemon USA Inc. were on the receiving end of such a lawsuit, but they recently prevailed on a motion to dismiss.

A Biden-era US Department of Labor (DOL) Rule permitting consideration of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors when choosing investments as a “tiebreaker” was recently upheld by Texas federal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk. This decision applied the US Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, revisiting three topics lost in 2025’s Department of Government Efficiency-era drama.

Last month, the Illinois General Assembly passed a bill establishing prevailing wage requirements and tax incentives for high voltage transmission line and utility-scale battery storage projects.

In 2025, the retail and fashion industries are bracing for a transformative year, heavily influenced by the policies of the new Trump Administration. These policies promise rapid and significant changes, particularly in areas such as trade, tariffs, and immigration, which will profoundly affect global supply chains and labor dynamics.

The second Trump presidency has arrived. With it – and particularly the Trump Administration’s push back on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programming at many levels – many organizations are under increased pressure to roll back DEI and broader environmental, social, and governance (ESG) programming.

The Trump Administration has issued a memo directing a temporary freeze on all environmental litigation to allow for review and potential reconsideration by the new Administration of its position in these matters.

Working toward a more circular economy will continue to be at the forefront in 2025. More and more, states are requiring producers to manage the end-of-life of an increasing number of consumer items, from packaging materials, paper products, and food service ware, to mattresses, carpets, and more. California is now the first state in the nation to establish an extended producer responsibility program expressly for textiles.

State governments increasingly engage on climate issues. In search of a new source of funding for hundreds of billions of dollars in anticipated climate adaptation costs, a recent New York state law could impose $75 billion of liability on major fossil fuel companies.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced this month that it will use enforcement discretion for the first greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reports due in 2026 to allow regulated businesses (doing business in California with annual revenue of over $1 billion) to report on GHG metrics using older data. CARB is also seeking public comment (due February 14, 2025) on the implementation of the GHG reporting requirements and those related to the disclosure of climate-related financial risks.

In the environmental space, 2024 has been a memorable year with regulatory efforts and court decisions touching on every aspect of environmental and energy regulation, capped out by a closely divided election.

The United States awoke on November 6 to a changed and improbable political landscape. The nation has re-elected Donald J. Trump as President and has given him a US Senate Republican majority and potentially a US House of Representatives Republican majority as well. As fatigued and steadfast local and state election workers continue to sort through ballots, we continue to look to the finalization of tallies for some remaining Senate and House races to determine the nature and size of Congressional majorities.

Republican lawmakers are continuing their antitrust push against environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investor initiatives by investigating a prominent climate coalition that is focused on getting companies to curb emissions.

Back in the 1970s, US Congress passed laws that allow private parties to bring citizen suits to enforce federal environmental laws.

Come September in a presidential election year, the policy world feels like a “winner take all” scenario with the election’s outcome determining how — or this year whether — we are regulated.

Governments are increasingly discussing climate change, including resilience to climate impacts and how to promote the energy transition.

ESG stands for “environmental, social, and governance.” Though often overlooked, two recent cases — Spence v. American Airlines and Exxon v. Arjuna Capital, LLC — focus on G’s place in the ESG initialism.

Policy debates normally focus on substance. Is climate change real? How can business entities weigh environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors into their decision-making?

On March 6, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved new rules requiring public companies to disclose extensive climate-related information in their registration statements and periodic reports.