#United States #Texas #Antitrust Lawsuit #Friends of Science #Climate Activism

Multi-State Anti-Trust Climate Initiatives Lawsuit Gains Momentum

In a landmark decision, a judge in Texas has given the green light for a multi-state lawsuit focusing on anti-trust violations related to climate initiatives. The lawsuit targets major asset managers, including BlackRock, alleging their involvement in a kind of climate activism that infringes on antitrust laws. This case could potentially influence $27 trillion in managed assets, marking a significant moment in the intersection of finance and environmental policy.

The Friends of Science Society, which advocates for a critical view of mainstream climate narratives, reports that efforts by these fund managers to dismiss the case have been thwarted. This lawsuit arises from findings presented in the Republican House Judiciary Committee's report titled 'Climate Control: Exposing The Decarbonization Collusion In Environmental, Social, And Governance (ESG) Investing.' This report suggests that large asset managers have collaborated with various environmentally-focused pressure groups and NGOs to manipulate markets in favor of their climate agendas.

In a series of statements, the House Judiciary Committee has described the actions of these asset managers as forming a 'climate cartel.' They argue that this cartel poses a direct threat to the American way of life, particularly targeting industries critical to daily existence, such as fossil fuels, aviation, and agriculture. The report outlines that the climate cartel's objectives could undermine everything from transportation to the food supply, indicating a war being waged on key sectors of the economy.

Friends of Science Society representatives highlight their criticisms of Net Zero activists, including prominent figures like David Suzuki and Seth Klein, who advocate for stringent measures against perceived climate crises. They argue that such drastic policies could lead to job losses and increased costs of living, ultimately creating a form of 'climate tyranny.' The Society believes that a recent US Department of Energy (DOE) climate report, which counters the idea of a climate crisis, should be a central point of discussion, rather than being ignored by mainstream media outlets.

The DOE's report, released on July 29, 2025, came to significant conclusions, including the notion that CO2-induced warming may not be as detrimental economically as commonly argued. Furthermore, it critiques current aggressive mitigation strategies as potentially misguided. The Society states that such findings remain largely unacknowledged in public forums.

Critics within the financial community, such as former Wall Street analyst Paul H. Tice, have labeled ESG and sustainable investing as harmful trends that could destabilize financial systems worldwide. In his book 'Race to Zero: How ESG Investing will Crater the Global Financial System,' Tice draws attention to the detrimental consequences of the current environmental policies being enacted in various countries, notably in Germany, where the implementation of green energy initiatives has been described as disastrous for their economy.

The Friends of Science Society is also calling attention to the public's shifting attitude toward climate change in Canada, where recent polls indicate that only a small fraction of the population views climate action as a top priority. The Society questions whether the demand for expensive climate initiatives, which are projected to cost around $476 billion between 2020 and 2030, is justified given the minimal public concern.

Despite the Society's findings and arguments, activist groups persist in pushing for climate risk reporting mandates for corporations, aligning with the discredited RCP 8.5 scenario favored by banks. This pressure is met with increasing criticism and skepticism from researchers and independent groups like Friends of Science, which assert that Net Zero targets are unrealistic and economically perilous.

In conclusion, the ongoing multi-state lawsuit against major asset managers signals a significant shift in the dialogue surrounding climate activism and its impacts on the economy and society at large. As more voices arise to challenge the dominant narratives, the outcome of this lawsuit could redefine the future of both environmental policy and financial regulation.