On February 26, 2026, the Texas Attorney General announced a $29.5 million settlement with Vanguard in multistate litigation alleging that major asset managers used stewardship and net‑zero initiatives to coordinate conduct among competing coal producers. Vanguard agreed to “strict passivity commitments” limiting its ability to influence corporate strategy or support environmental and social shareholder proposals, while denying wrongdoing and admitting no liability.

Whatever one’s views on ESG politics, the settlement raises a narrower and more consequential question: what happens when politically framed enforcement rhetoric and settlement leverage are used to recharacterize ordinary fiduciary risk governance as unlawful collusion, without adjudicated findings?

(more…)