Texas’ anti-green energy crusade just collapsed in court for being 'unconstitutionally vague' – We Got This Covered
Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.
Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Texas’ anti-green energy crusade just collapsed in court for being ‘unconstitutionally vague’

They can no longer punish businesses for failing to align with state views.

A federal judge just delivered a massive blow to Texas’ anti-green energy efforts, declaring a major 2021 law that restricted state investments in sustainable businesses unconstitutional this week. According to a Reuters report, U.S. District Judge Alan Albright, an appointee of President Trump, made his decision public on Wednesday. 

Recommended Videos

He didn’t mince words, ruling that the Texas law, known as Senate Bill 13 or SB 13, violated key First Amendment free speech protections. This is huge news because it means the state can’t punish companies simply for speaking out about climate change or associating with organizations that oppose the fossil fuel industry.

Judge Albright, based in Austin, said the law was “unconstitutionally vague” and “facially overbroad.” He noted that the vagueness of the language had led to discriminatory enforcement against businesses. The law aimed to restrict state investments in any company that sought to rely less on fossil fuels or actively boycott that industry. However, the judge found that the state’s definition of what constituted a “boycott” was far too wide-reaching.

It is awful that state officials could go after a business for just making a statement.

Judge Albright explained that “SB 13’s definition of ‘boycott energy companies’ permits the state to penalize companies for all manner of protected expression concerning fossil fuels.” Context is important here. The law sounds like an attempt to silence conversation about climate risk within Texas, the largest oil-producing state in the United States. The Republican-led state has actively tried to crack down on businesses based on their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies.

The challenge against SB 13 was brought by the American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC), which represents more than 250,000 members. They argued that through this law, the state was trying to force companies to align their investments with the state’s political views, regardless of what was best for their bottom line or the environment.

The defendants named in the lawsuit included Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and former Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar, as well as Hegar’s acting successor, Kelly Hancock. The ASBC, was quick to celebrate the outcome, releasing a statement that called the decision a “massive win” for investors, sustainable businesses, and corporate freedom.

They said, “The court has affirmed what we’ve always known: you cannot punish businesses for their investment decisions or silence those who speak about climate risk.” This is a big change for Texas, and is indicative of a larger change that is happening in the state. With Trump’s pet projects being held up because of bureaucracy and new democratic leaders taking the helm in the once dominantly Red state, it will be interesting to see what the future brings.


We Got This Covered is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy
Author
Image of Jaymie Vaz
Jaymie Vaz
Jaymie Vaz is a freelance writer who likes to use words to explore all the things that fascinate her. You can usually find her doing unnecessarily deep dives into games, movies, or fantasy/Sci-fi novels. Or having rousing debates about how political and technological developments are causing cultural shifts around the world.