This Week in ESG and Impact Investing

On January 21, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States convened in Washington, D.C., for oral arguments in the high-stakes case of Trump v. Cook (No. 25A312). The proceedings, which began at 10:03 a.m. before Chief Justice Roberts and the Associate Justices, center on President Donald J. Trump's emergency application to stay a preliminary injunction that reinstated Lisa D. Cook to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The central legal battle involves whether the President has the authority to remove a Federal Reserve governor for "cause" based on alleged misconduct that occurred before her tenure, specifically, claims of "deceit or gross negligence" regarding conflicting mortgage applications submitted in 2021. Solicitor General D. John Sauer represented the Applicants (the President), while Paul D. Clement argued on behalf of Respondent Lisa Cook. Amza Togore at the Supreme Cour t The core of the dispute rests on the definition of "ca...

  The recent Supreme Court decision curtailing affirmative action in college admissions not only exposes the real impact of ethical transgressions but also highlights a deeper problem rooted in racism, greed, and the insidious legacy of colonialism. This decision serves as an indictment of a court that is supposed to uphold justice but instead perpetuates the status quo, reinforcing systemic inequalities that plague our society and move us away from equity. At the heart of this matter lies the corrosive influence of white supremacy. Affirmative action was designed to address the historical injustices inflicted upon marginalized communities, particularly people of color who have long suffered the consequences of discrimination and limited opportunities. By dismantling these programs, the Supreme Court sends a distressing message that the voices and struggles of these communities are inconsequential in the pursuit of a fair and just society. The court's decision also underscores the ...

Recent Supreme Court decisions damage the international reputation of the US. On June 24, the Court, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , upheld a Mississippi law that banned abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, with no exception for rape or incest. The decision strikes down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.  In West Virginia v. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA ) prevents the agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions, a core mission and task of the EPA. The regulation questioned concerns carbon dioxide generated by power plants — in the middle of increased global efforts to reduce these emissions. This case was based on the Clean Power Plan, a plan to cut emissions from coal-fired power plants that was never implemented. Biden tried to have the case dismissed since the policy at issue was not operational nor was it being resurrected. The Court ruled anyway. The EPA decision will have the added impact of limiting the ability of the US government to addr...

Black women die in childbirth at disproportionate rates compared to their white counterparts. Research conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) clearly shows that social determinants - access to nutrition, transportation, and healthcare——are crucial factors. With the decision to restrict access to birth control and care, the Supreme Court imposed additional penalties on a selected portion of the US population - Black women. They were added without due process or a trial at the individual level. These elevated risks are clear and undeniable, as explained below. Assume two population groups or sectors. In Sector One, women die in childbirth at the rate of ten per 1,000 live births. In Sector Two, the maternal mortality rate is 100 per 1,000 live births. With the elimination of birth control, there are 2,000 live births in each sector. This implies 20 Sector One deaths and 200 in Sector Two. Amanda Stevenson, a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder, ...

Submitting a brief to the Supreme Court There is a case before the Supreme Court that will allow every person responsible for the recent financial crisis to escape punishment. The case is  Gabelli v. Securities and Exchange  Commission  and   "a decision is expected in the court's upcoming term, which ends in June." I have decided to file a research paper (called an Amicus Brief) with the Supreme Court explaining why letting these guys go might be a bad idea for the rest of us, but I need your help. http://www.indiegogo.com/ supremecourt