Washington, DC – Oklahoma district court Judge Sheila Stinson issued a temporary injunction barring the state from enforcing an anti-responsible investing law which would prohibit “pension funds and localities from doing business with financial firms accused of boycotting fossil fuels.” The law has cost cities in Oklahoma over $180 million since it was implemented.
In response, Unlocking America’s Future spokesperson Kyle Herrig said the following:
“Judge Stinson’s decision is plain common sense. Of course it would be unconstitutional to target ESG investing when it is just one of many criteria used to determine the best outcome for investors. Judge Stinson’s ruling means those making decisions about where money is invested for state retirees can continue putting their interests above those of politicians.”
Oklahoma lawmakers went forward with this law, even though multiple studies show that anti-ESG laws cost taxpayers money.
- The Kansas State Division of the Budget projected reduced returns of $3.6 billion over 10 years for the Kansas Public Retirement System if anti-ESG investment restrictions were adopted.
- The Arkansas Public Employees Retirement System estimated they could lose $30-40 million each year due to an anti-ESG bill requiring public divestiture from institutions using ESG-related metrics. The Arkansas Teacher Retirement System estimated an additional $7 million in losses each year as a result of the legislation.
- An economic analysis found that taxpayers in six states — Kentucky, Florida, Louisiana, Oklahoma, West Virginia and Missouri — could be on the hook for up to $700 million in excess interest payments if restrictions on sustainable investing are implemented.
- A 2022 study found Texas’ anti-responsible investing laws would result in up to $500 million in undue interest over the first eight months of enforcement, costs which would ultimately be borne by taxpayers in the state.
