Connect with us

Politics

DeSantis eyes lawsuit over Bud Light’s deal with trans influencer. Experts are skeptical.

Sources agree company was acting in its best interests

Published

2 years ago

on

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (Screen capture/CNN)

As sales continue to slump after months of conservative backlash against Bud Light’s social media spot with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) announced he will explore a potential lawsuit against the beer brand’s parent company, Anheuser-Busch InBev.

“It appears to me that AB InBev may have breached legal duties owed to its shareholders,” DeSantis said in a letter shared on Twitter Friday outlining possible grounds for legal action on behalf of the shareholders of Florida’s pension funds.

Columbia University Law School Professor John Coffee, however, told the Washington Blade a legal doctrine called the business judgment rule “fully protects the board of Anheuser-Busch InBev from any liability for breach of fiduciary duty that might be asserted by Florida’s pension funds in a derivative suit.”

Caselaw directs courts to uphold decisions by company directors provided they are made in good faith, with the care expected of a reasonably prudent person, and with the reasonable belief that they were acting in the corporation’s best interests.

Multinational drink conglomerate AB InBev suffered financially as a result of Bud Light’s promotion with Mulvaney, with sales for the brand down 25 percent from last year according to market research data reported by CNBC.

“No doubt, Anheuser-Busch lost money because of the populist reaction to the use of a transgender ‘influencer,’ but that is not the standard for liability,” said Coffee, who is recognized as one of the country’s leading experts in securities law, corporate governance, white collar crime, complex litigation, and class actions.

Directors “were seeking to promote their product with a new audience, and it backfired, but that is not a breach of duty,” he said, adding, “Management has the legal right to innovate and try new tactics.”

Andrew Isen, founder and president of WinMark Concepts, agreed, telling the Blade, “Bud Light is an entry beer because of the price point,” so it made sense for the beer maker to target the younger demographics who comprise the influencer’s sizable online following.

“No one foresaw this backlash,” he said.

“They’re making business decisions, they’re making marketing decisions, to grow their business, and that’s what their responsibilities to their shareholders are,” said Isen, whose clients are mostly large publicly traded corporations.

Additionally, he said, partnering with an LGBTQ public figure like Mulvaney makes sense from a market research perspective.

For instance, Isen pointed to data from management consulting firm McKinsey & Co., which found that “for five years, our research has shown a positive, statistically significant correlation between company financial outperformance and diversity, on the dimensions of both gender and ethnicity.”

Coffee, who has repeatedly been listed among The 100 Most Influential Lawyers in America and topped rankings of the most-cited scholars in corporate and business law, told the Blade he is not aware of any previous cases in which a firm’s marketing or advertising decision provided grounds for shareholder litigation for breach of fiduciary duty in a derivative suit.

“I do not know if litigation will be brought,” he said, adding, “this sounds more like a political stunt.”

If DeSantis’s probe leads to an actual complaint on behalf of shareholders, Coffee said, “I would not expect it to survive a motion to dismiss in Delaware,” if AB InBev is headquartered in the state, where most commercial disputes are adjudicated.

“But the suit might be brought [improperly] in Florida,” Coffee said, “and anything might happen there.”

Regardless, Coffee said, “Gov. DeSantis will make no friends in the business community with these over broad attacks.”

DeSantis, addressing shareholders of his state’s pension funds, wrote in his letter on Friday that, “We must prudently manage the funds of Florida’s hardworking law enforcement officers, teachers, firefighters, and first responders in a manner that focuses on growing returns, not subsidizing an ideological agenda through woke virtue signaling.”

AB InBev is just the latest target of the governor’s crusade against “wokeism” in corporate America, a battle that his party is increasingly waging against companies’ environmental and social governance policies, their diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, and their criticism of conservative policies or policymakers.

Firms like Blackstone had come to understand concepts like responsible environmental stewardship and diversity in corporate boards of directors as intrinsic values that are good for business and “integral to their shareholders,” Isen said, referring to the investment management juggernaut that boasts more than $991 billion in assets under management.

However, as these moves come under fire from various factions on the right — intimidation by elected leaders, coordinated online attacks, incendiary coverage in partisan media — the business community is taking notice. Isen pointed to “the amount of companies that are getting rid of their diversity officers,” as reported last week in The Wall Street Journal.

This “noise,” Isen said, is “scaring companies to death.”

Other state officials have recently weaponized the power of their governments against companies over their support for the LGBTQ community. On July 5, seven Republican state attorneys general issued a letter to Target Corp. notifying the retailer that certain merchandise in its seasonal Pride collection may violate their obscenity statutes.

The popularity of DeSantis’s attacks on “woke” corporations will soon be tested as the governor heads into Republican primary races in hopes of securing his party’s nomination for the 2024 presidential election.  

DeSantis’s office did not respond to written questions or provide comment for this story.

Related Topics:
Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Congress

Congress passes ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ with massive cuts to health insurance coverage

Roughly 1.8 million LGBTQ Americans rely on Medicaid

Published

2 weeks ago

on

July 3, 2025

By

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The “Big, Beautiful Bill” heads to President Donald Trump’s desk following the vote by the Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives Thursday, which saw two nays from GOP members and unified opposition from the entire Democratic caucus.

To partially offset the cost of tax breaks that disproportionately favor the wealthy, the bill contains massive cuts to Medicaid and social safety net programs like food assistance for the poor while adding a projected $3.3 billion to the deficit.

Policy wise, the signature legislation of Trump’s second term rolls back clean energy tax credits passed under the Biden-Harris administration while beefing up funding for defense and border security.

Roughly 13 percent of LGBTQ adults in the U.S., about 1.8 million people, rely on Medicaid as their primary health insurer, compared to seven percent of non-LGBTQ adults, according to the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute think tank on sexual orientation and gender identities.

In total, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the cuts will cause more than 10 million Americans to lose their coverage under Medicaid and anywhere from three to five million to lose their care under Affordable Care Act marketplace plans.

A number of Republicans in the House and Senate opposed the bill reasoning that they might face political consequences for taking away access to healthcare for, particularly, low-income Americans who rely on Medicaid. Poorer voters flocked to Trump in last year’s presidential election, exit polls show.

A provision that would have blocked the use of federal funds to reimburse medical care for transgender youth was blocked by the Senate Parliamentarian and ultimately struck from the legislation — reportedly after the first trans member of Congress, U.S. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.) and the first lesbian U.S. senator, Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), shored up unified opposition to the proposal among Congressional Democrats.

Continue Reading

Congress

Ritchie Torres says he is unlikely to run for NY governor

One poll showed gay Democratic congressman nearly tied with Kathy Hochul

Published

2 weeks ago

on

July 2, 2025

By

U.S. Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Gay Democratic Congressman Ritchie Torres of New York is unlikely to challenge New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) in the state’s next gubernatorial race, he said during an appearance Wednesday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

“I’m unlikely to run for governor,” he said. ““I feel like the assault that we’ve seen on the social safety net in the Bronx is so unprecedented. It’s so overwhelming that I’m going to keep my focus on Washington, D.C.”

Torres and Hochul were nearly tied in a poll this spring of likely Democratic voters in New York City, fueling speculation that the congressman might run. A Siena College poll, however, found Hochul leading with a wider margin.

Back in D.C., the congressman and his colleagues are unified in their opposition to President Donald Trump’s signature legislation, the “Big Beautiful Bill,” which heads back to the House after passing the Senate by one vote this week.

To pay for tax cuts that disproportionately advantage the ultra-wealthy and large corporations, the president and Congressional Republicans have proposed massive cuts to Medicaid and other social programs.

A provision in the Senate version of the bill that would have blocked the use of federal funds to reimburse medical care for transgender youth was blocked by the Senate Parliamentarian and ultimately struck from the legislation, reportedly after pressure from transgender U.S. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-Del.) and lesbian U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.).

Torres on “Morning Joe” said, “The so-called Big Beautiful Bill represents a betrayal of the working people of America and nowhere more so than in the Bronx,” adding, “It’s going to destabilize every health care provider, every hospital.”

Continue Reading

Congress

House Democrats oppose Bessent’s removal of SOGI from discrimination complaint forms

Congressional Equality Caucus sharply criticized move

Published

2 weeks ago

on

July 1, 2025

By

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A letter issued last week by a group of House Democrats objects to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s removal of sexual orientation and gender identity as bases for sex discrimination complaints in several Equal Employment Opportunity forms.

Bessent, who is gay, is the highest ranking openly LGBTQ official in American history and the second out Cabinet member next to Pete Buttigieg, who served as transportation secretary during the Biden-Harris administration.

The signatories to the letter include a few out members of Congress, Congressional Equality Caucus chair and co-chairs Mark Takano (Calif.), Ritchie Torres (N.Y.), and Becca Balint (Vt.), along with U.S. Reps. Nikema Williams (Ga.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), Delia Ramirez (Ill.), Joyce Beatty (Ohio), Lloyd Doggett (Texas), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.), Josh Gottheimer (N.J.), and Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas).

The letter explains the “critical role” played by the EEO given the strictures and limits on how federal employees can find recourse for unlawful workplace discrimination — namely, without the ability to file complaints directly with the Employment Opportunity Commission or otherwise engage with the agency unless the complainant “appeal[s] an agency’s decision following the agency’s investigation or request[s] a hearing before an administrative judge.”

“Your attempt to remove ‘gender identity’ and ‘sexual orientation’ as bases for sex discrimination complaints in numerous Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) forms will create unnecessary hurdles to employees filing EEO complaints and undermine enforcement of federal employee’s nondiscrimination protections,” the members wrote in their letter.

They further explain the legal basis behind LGBTQ inclusive nondiscrimination protections for federal employees in the EEOC’s decisions in Macy v. Holder (2012) and Baldwin v. Foxx (2015) and the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020).

“It appears that these changes may be an attempt by the department to dissuade employees from reporting gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination,” the lawmakers wrote. “Without forms clearly enumerating gender identity and sexual orientation as forms of sex discrimination, the average employee who experiences these forms of discrimination may see these forms and not realize that the discrimination they experienced was unlawful and something that they can report and seek recourse for.”

“A more alarming view would be that the department no longer plans to fulfill its legal obligations to investigate complaints of gender identity and sexual orientation and ensure its
employees are working in an environment free from these forms of discrimination,” they added.

Continue Reading

Popular