Investment giant agrees to provide documents in multistate coal lawsuit while denying wrongdoing, as litigation continues against BlackRock and State Street.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Opponents of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing say forthcoming internal communications from Vanguard Group could shed light on whether major asset managers coordinated efforts to influence the coal industry, following a multistate legal settlement.
According to a Just the News report, Vanguard agreed, as part of a settlement resolving allegations it colluded to harm the coal market, to turn over communications exchanged with other parties. The firm denies any wrongdoing.
The agreement stems from a lawsuit filed by a coalition of 11 Republican state attorneys general in 2024, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The suit alleged that BlackRock, State Street Corporation, and Vanguard Group—together managing nearly $40 trillion in assets—conspired to restrict coal production through coordinated ESG-driven climate initiatives.
Will Hild, executive director of Consumers’ Research, said during a recent webinar that the documents Vanguard will provide could clarify whether coordination occurred.
“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 are not part of the settlement and remain defendants in ongoing litigation. BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, oversees trillions in assets, while State Street reported approximately $5.7 trillion in assets under management as of the end of 2025.
In a previous public statement responding to related allegations, BlackRock said, “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,” according to a company statement.
Under the terms of the agreement announced by Texas officials, Vanguard will pay $29.5 million to participating states and commit to remaining a passive shareholder in portfolio companies. The settlement states that Vanguard will not attempt to direct business strategies through financial pressure or shareholder proposals. The agreement explicitly notes that Vanguard denies any illegal conduct and that the settlement does not constitute an admission of wrongdoing.
The settlement was detailed in an announcement by the Texas Attorney General’s Office, which described it as an industry-changing agreement to protect the coal sector, as outlined in the official release.
Brent Webster, first assistant attorney general of Texas, said the coalition intends to “aggressively” continue litigation against the remaining firms. Webster, who joined the office in 2020, said his team focused early on financial alliances such as the Net Zero Banking Alliance and Net Zero Asset Managers, which coordinated efforts toward emissions reduction targets.
“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.
He argued that the alleged coordination had implications beyond coal-producing states. Although Texas produced 12.3 million short tons of coal in 2024, compared with Wyoming’s 190.7 million short tons, Webster said the broader energy sector—including oil and natural gas—could be affected.
“When these climate-change terrorists target the energy industry, they’re targeting oil, natural gas and coal,” Webster said.
Webster described his litigation approach as direct.
“Let’s just get into court, have some real deadlines, do some real discovery and see what’s happening here,” he said, explaining that his office preferred prompt judicial review over prolonged negotiations.
He added that corporations initially treated the lawsuits cautiously, concerned that settlements might prompt further claims from other plaintiffs. Over time, Webster said, companies began engaging more directly with the state’s office.
“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 credited Vanguard for cooperating in resolving the case.
“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,” he said.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office is also reviewing the practices of proxy advisory firms Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis, according to Webster, who suggested additional legal actions could follow.
“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.
Original article
Comments