DOJ, FTC State Position in ESG-Related Coal Suit Against Largest Asset Managers

The DOJ has taken a side in a case accusing BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard of suppressing prices in the coal market.

On Thursday, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission filed a statement of interest supporting a complaint which alleges BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street conspired to suppress the coal market.

In November 2024, 13 state attorneys general, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, filed a complaint, Texas et. al. v. BlackRock Inc., State Street Corp., and The Vanguard Group, against the three asset managers, alleging they conspired to suppress coal production in the United States and drive up the price of the commodity.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

According to the complaint, the three asset managers used their holdings in U.S. coal companies to pressure those companies to adopt environmental, social and governance targets. The complaint highlights these managers’ membership of organizations like Climate Action 100+ and the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, which both called for achieving net-zero investment portfolios.

The complaint also alleges that the managers achieved “supra-competitive” profits by decreasing coal output and increasing prices. It also alleges the asset managers violated the Clayton Act, which prohibits the acquisition of minority stakes in companies to lessen competition. 

“The President has declared a national energy emergency, and we need competition in coal production now more than ever to help fuel American energy dominance,” said U.S. Assistant Attorney General Abigail A. Slater in a statement, referencing President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14156, which declared a national energy emergency, and Executive Order 14261, which called for an increase in domestic energy production, including coal.

“As the Supreme Court has held, ‘social justifications’ for anticompetitive conduct ‘do not make it any less unlawful,’” Slater continued in the statement. “We will not hesitate to stand up against powerful financial firms that use Americans’ retirement savings to harm competition under the guise of ESG.”

BlackRock and State Street were signatories of Climate Action 100+ but later withdrew, while Vanguard was never a signatory. All three firms were, at one point, signatories of the Net Zero Asset Manager Initiative, which paused operations in January, following BlackRock’s exit from the organization.

The three asset managers are the largest shareholders in all nine publicly listed U.S. coal companies, which comprise half of U.S. coal output, according to the statement of interest. The three managers are accused of engaging with the management of these companies to lower their carbon emissions by restricting coal production. 

In a statement, BlackRock denied the allegations: “The DOJ and FTC’s support for this baseless case undermines the Trump administration’s goal of American energy independence,” BlackRock stated. “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.”

State Street called the lawsuit “baseless”: “State Street Global Advisors acts in the long-term financial interests of investors with a focus on enhancing shareholder value,” State Street stated. “As long-term capital providers, we have a mutual interest in the long-term success of our portfolio companies. This lawsuit is baseless, and we look forward to presenting the facts through the legal process. Additional filings do not change our assessment.”

Vanguard responded that it acted lawfully: “Though we have concerns with many of the legal interpretations promoted by the agencies, Vanguard appreciates their explicit acknowledgement that the antitrust laws allow these three things: ‘passive fund investing,’ ‘shareholder advocacy for better corporate governance’ and ‘active investing that doesn’t harm competition,’ a Vanguard spokesperson said. “The facts show Vanguard has stayed well within this construct.”

The Investment Company Institute, which represents regulated investment fund companies, stated Thursday that the federal intervention in the case could harm, rather than help, investment in coal companies.

“Fund investments are invaluable in providing capital formation for American coal, oil, and gas companies,” the ICI stated. “Billions upon billions of dollars are invested by asset managers today on behalf of their clients to make the U.S. energy industry the best in the world both … like President Trump wants. The case the federal government is now weighing in on seeks to attack minority investors for decisions they believe are in the best interest of fund shareholders. The relief suggested by the plaintiffs would devastate funds, investors, and the energy industry itself. “

House Bill Aims to Increase Oversight of Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board

The legislation would establish an independent inspector general for the agency that administers the retirement plan for more than 7 million federal employees. 

A bill introduced in the House of Representatives aims to strengthen oversight of the federal government’s retirement savings plan by establishing an independent inspector general for the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.

Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-Washington, D.C., introduced the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Inspector General Act of 2025, on May 13. The bill seeks to amend the Inspector General Act of 1978 to include the FRTIB among the federal entities required to have an inspector general.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

The FRTIB manages the Thrift Savings Plan, a retirement savings and investment program for 7.2 million federal employees and members of the uniformed services that has $937 billion in assets.

The measure has been referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, of which Norton is a member. As a delegate representing Washington, D.C., which does not have a representative, Norton may introduce bills and participate in debate but is ineligible to vote on the bill.

If enacted, the inspector general would be responsible for conducting audits, investigations and evaluations to promote efficiency while preventing any fraud, waste or abuse within the agency.

Norton introduced the bill in part because of the troubled 2022 rollout of a new online system for the program. 

“I frequently heard from constituents about many problems with the TSP system after it changed platforms in 2022, including discrepancies in account balances, difficulties accessing accounts, lost beneficiary information, and hours-long wait times for customer service,” Norton said in a statement. “While I am pleased that the widespread problems with the TSP’s online system have been addressed since then, the FRTIB should be held to the same standards of accountability as any other federal agency.”

The FRTIB, which oversees the TSP, introduced a suite of new features in 2022 aimed at modernizing the system. These included a redesigned participant login interface, a mobile app and virtual assistant, electronic document signing, streamlined online transactions, and access to a mutual fund window.

However, the transition quickly ran into legal issues. In June 2023, seven TSP participants filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia a complaint against the FRTIB, along with contractors Accenture Federal Services and Alight Solutions—the firms responsible for implementing the system overhaul. The plaintiffs alleged that the botched rollout caused significant financial harm and accused the defendants of breaching their fiduciary duties.

The FRTIB and its board members had motions to dismiss the charges against them granted in March 2025, but motions to dismiss filed by Accenture and Alight were denied.

«