Shareholders of companies worth $13 trillion vote unanimously to defeat anti-DEI proposals
Conservative activist Robby Starbuck was interviewed in March by Nikkei Asia. “Using DEI practices to artificially raise disadvantaged peoples to the same level as white males is ‘a communist concept that is really not friendly to the idea of free markets and capitalism,’ said Starbuck,” the financial newspaper reported.
But those who prioritize profits – the north star of free markets and capitalism – say DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) is a business imperative. Shareholders of 29 of the largest corporations in the U.S., and one in Canada (lululemon athletica), have voted unanimously to reject anti-DEI proposals in 2025, by overwhelming margins – most by 98 or 99 percent of voting shares.
Boards of directors of companies collectively valued at more than $13 trillion dollars unanimously urged their shareholders to vote against anti-DEI proposals – some titled “Cease DEI efforts” – presented by conservative shareholder activist groups. Shareholders from companies including Costco, Apple, Levi Strauss, among others, pitched a shutout, going 30-0, handing resounding defeats to all anti-DEI proposals that were presented during this year’s proxy season.
And shareholders from some companies that Robby Starbuck claimed to have “flipped” – pressured to revise their DEI initiatives – also voted overwhelmingly to reject anti-DEI proposals in 2025, including McDonald’s, Walmart, Boeing, John Deere, and Caterpillar.
The Heritage Foundation, organizer of Project 2025, announced in an April press release that Starbuck was joining the organization as a visiting fellow for its capital markets initiative, which pressures businesses to address “agendas that are unethical, immoral, and illegal—like so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.”
David Graham, staff writer at the Atlantic and author of The Project: How Project 2025 Is Reshaping America told PBS about the Heritage Foundation’s vision: “The priority really is on men as breadwinners. They see women raising children as being the highest calling for them. And they see the Christian heritage of the United States as being essential and something that needs to be brought to the fore.” And “when they take on DEI programs,” those initiatives are coming from this vision.
But boards and shareholders have pronounced anti-DEI proposals DOA (dead on arrival) in 2025.
CEOs speak out for DEI
A March survey from research firm GlobeScan revealed that two-thirds of Americans want CEOs to publicly defend DEI initiatives. And several CEOs have heeded the message.
Reporting for nonprofit project Impactivize, I attended most of the 2025 online shareholder meetings where anti-DEI proposals were presented and defeated. CEOs of several corporations articulated their companies’ commitments to diversity and inclusion. In Q&A (question-and-answer) sessions during annual meetings of shareholders, several CEOs responded to questions about their companies’ diversity initiatives.
Rob Davis, Chairman of the Board and CEO of pharmaceutical giant Merck responded to a question from a shareholder about DEI at their May meeting, where shareholders voted to reject an anti-DEI proposal, 99-1 percent. Davis said: “Our company has a longstanding commitment to diversity and inclusion. It’s at the core of who we are, our values, and how we operate as a company. It’s also a strategic imperative.”
In the Q&A session at Southern Company’s annual meeting of shareholders in May, the utility giant’s Chairman, President and CEO Chris Womack, a Black man, responded to a question about an anti-DEI proposal, which shareholders voted to reject, 98-2 percent. Womack responded, citing Southern’s Intentional Inclusion program, saying, “each and every employee has a fair shot at achieving their potential.”
At Walmart’s annual meeting of shareholders in June, President and CEO Doug McMillon underscored the company’s inclusive policies in response to a question about the company’s support for the LGBTQ+ community. McMillon then handed the floor to EVP and Chief People Officer Donna Morris who added, “We’re happy to serve the LGBTQ+ community and Happy Pride Month to those that are part of the community.” Walmart shareholders voted to reject an anti-DEI proposal by nearly 100 percent.
Most of the anti-DEI proposals were presented to corporations at their annual meetings in 2025 by Stefan Padfield, executive director of the Free Enterprise Project (FEP), an endeavor of conservative nonprofit the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR). The FEP website says it is “the original and premier opponent of the woke takeover of American corporate life.”
In a Q&A session at Goldman Sachs’ annual shareholders meeting in April, Padfield asked the financial giant’s Chairman and CEO David Solomon about the company’s support for “transgenderism.” Solomon replied to Padfield’s question, saying, “We run an inclusive organization, and we’re going to continue to run an inclusive organization.”
Goldman Sachs has a perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index, a benchmarking tool for LGBTQ+ workplace initiatives. And the Goldman Sachs Board urged shareholders to vote to reject NCPPR’s anti-DEI proposal, writing in its proxy statement: “We believe that diversity, including diversity of thought, experience and perspectives, is important to our commercial success.” Goldman shareholders voted to reject NCPPR’s anti-DEI proposal, 98-2 percent.
CEOs outside of shareholder meetings have also publicly defended their companies’ diversity policies.
In April, Marriott CEO Anthony Capuano reaffirmed the company’s commitment to DEI. Speaking at the Great Place to Work For All Summit in Las Vegas, Capuano shared how the hospitality giant responded to pressure on DEI policies:
“The winds blow, but there are some fundamental truths for those 98 years,” Capuano told the audience. “We welcome all to our hotels and we create opportunities for all—and fundamentally those will never change. The words might change, but that’s who we are as a company.” Capuano said he had received 40,000 emails from Marriott associates thanking him for speaking out.
CEO of e.l.f. Beauty Tarang Amin told CNN’s Erin Burnett in February that “our diversity is a key competitive advantage in terms of our results.” Amin posted on LinkedIn: “I’ve yet to meet a CEO who isn’t committed to fostering a high performing and diverse workforce. At e.l.f., we believe the diversity of our team is one of our greatest strengths, contributing to 23 consecutive quarters of net sales and market share growth.”
But no company has been more stalwart defending its diversity initiatives than Costco Wholesale. The retailer’s President and CEO Ron Vachris responded in January to a customer who complained about the company’s diversity policies. Vachris emailed the customer: “If these are the policies you see as offensive, I must tell you I am not prepared to change,” he wrote, reported the Wall Street Journal.
I reported for the Queen Zone in January about Costco’s Board defending DEI, urging its shareholders to reject an anti-DEI proposal. In its 2025 proxy statement, the Costco Board of Directors responded to an anti-DEI proposal, attributing the company’s success to DEI. The Board wrote:
“Our efforts at diversity, equity and inclusion remind and reinforce with everyone at our Company the importance of creating opportunities for all. We believe that these efforts enhance our capacity to attract and retain employees who will help our business succeed. This capacity is critical because we owe our success to our now over 300,000 employees around the globe.”
Costco shareholders voted in January to reject an anti-DEI proposal by a margin of 98-2 percent, as urged by its Board. Just days after Costco shareholders voted, 19 Republican state attorneys general sent a letter to Costco CEO Vachris, demanding the retailer “repeal” its DEI initiatives. In April, Iowa Republican attorney general Brenna Bird, who co-led the Republican AGs’ letter, announced she had had a “productive” meeting with Costco about its DEI policies. But Costco has not announced any changes to its DEI initiatives.
Fast Company named Costco CEO Vachris its “Visionary of the Year” in June for not budging on DEI. The magazine reported: “‘Vachris’s actions,’ says David Glasgow, a DEI expert at NYU Law School, ‘provided a good example for other organizations that are feeling a lot of fear and anxiety right now.’”
DEI is good for business
Costco’s foot traffic has increased since the company “doubled down” on DEI, while Target, a company that Robby Starbuck announced in January was “ending many of their woke policies” in response to his pressure campaign, has suffered decreased foot traffic. Shareholders of other large retailers, including Best Buy and Dick’s Sporting Goods, have followed Costco’s lead, as their shareholders also voted overwhelmingly to reject anti-DEI proposals in 2025. A 2022 analysis from consulting firm Deloitte concluded: “DEI continues to be a major priority for consumers.”
In February, the NAACP issued the Black Consumer Advisory, “to inform and caution Black consumers about the ongoing and intentional rollback of nationwide Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) commitments by corporations and institutions.” The advisory noted that “Black consumers possess immense economic power, with a purchasing power exceeding $1.8 trillion annually,” and urged consumers to “Spend Intentionally: Support businesses and organizations that maintain and expand their DEI commitments and prioritize investment in Black communities.”
NAACP CEO and President Derrick Johnson said in a statement: “We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again – diversity is better for the bottom line.”
Economist Robert Reich reinforced this idea, writing in a Substack column in June: “On the other hand, corporations like Costco and Apple, which have stood firm against Trump and in favor of DEI, have done well.
“That’s because diversity is good for business. Investors and consumers often consider a company’s commitment to diversity in making their decisions. Most big institutional shareholders such as BlackRock and Vanguard believe that a diverse workforce and customer base increases corporate profits.”
Data clearly shows that diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives are good for business. A large-scale study released in 2023 by As You Sow, a nonprofit shareholder advocacy group promoting corporate social responsibility, revealed the direct correlation between DEI and bottom line results, “making a clear business and investor case for diversity as a material factor in financial success.”
“Simply put, a diverse workforce led by a diverse management team performs better financially. These findings empower corporate boards and investors who want to outperform financially to increase workplace diversity, racial justice, and equity as core business practices and push back against unfounded attacks,” said Andrew Behar, CEO of As You Sow.
“When we consider how complex individual company performance is, and how hard it can be to attribute outperformance to any one factor, it becomes all the more remarkable that the data shows a statistically significant link between diverse management and corporate financial success,” said the study’s lead author Meredith Benton, workplace equity program manager at As You Sow and founder Whistle Stop Capital, an investment strategy firm.
Behar told me in an interview, “Businesses should make business decisions based on business data, not politics.”
Corporate governance experts tend to agree. Andrew Winden, Assistant Professor at the University of Oregon School of Law and former fellow at Stanford’s Rock Center for Corporate Governance messaged me: “The bottom line is that most investors (again, especially the holders of large blocks of shares) are fundamentally pragmatic, meaning that they support proposals that they actually believe will improve the performance of the company.”
DEI is not illegal
President Donald Trump has made the war on diversity, equity and inclusion a centerpiece of his presidency – including DEI in the private sector. He issued an Executive Order on January 21 to “combat illegal private-sector DEI,” noting, “(whether specifically denominated ‘DEI’ or otherwise).” Trump ordered federal agencies to “identify up to nine potential civil compliance investigations of publicly traded corporations.”
In his EO, Trump repeatedly referred to “illegal DEI.” In February, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo dangling the threat of “criminal investigations” into companies for their “illegal DEI and DEIA” practices (diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility).
Bondi’s Department of Justice took the attack against DEI in the private sector a step further in May, dangling cash incentives for whistleblowers who file lawsuits against companies that receive federal funding. In a memo, Deputy AG Todd Blanche wrote that private parties who file claims under the False Claims Act would be eligible, “if successful, sharing in any monetary recovery,” adding, “The Department strongly encourages these lawsuits.”
But DEI is not illegal. 16 state attorneys general have encouraged businesses to stand firm on their DEI initiatives. Illinois state attorney general, Kwame Raoul, co-chair of the Democratic Attorneys General Association, wrote for Proxy Preview in April, on behalf of 15 other state AGs:
“Employment policies incorporating DEIA best practices are not only compliant with state and federal civil rights laws, they also help reduce litigation risk by affirmatively protecting against retaliation, harassment, and other discriminatory conduct.”
AG Raoul wrote: “My counterparts and I will not back down, be misled, or shy away from the nomenclature that advances the interests and vital purposes of DEIA initiatives. To preserve the social fabric of a nation founded on the principles of equality, justice, and liberty, I encourage you to stand firm as well.”
Attorney Jon Hyman (and Impactivize advisory board member) wrote in a post on LinkedIn In March:
“DEIA isn’t illegal, and it’s not going anywhere. It’s a critical tool for building better workplaces and stronger businesses. Companies that back away from DEIA out of fear or misinformation aren’t protecting themselves—they’re setting themselves up to fall behind. The law is on your side. The business case is on your side. The only question is whether you’re willing to do the work, no matter what the current administration says or does.”
A June Supreme Court decision also didn’t make DEI illegal, as lawyers have explained about the Ames “reverse discrimination” ruling. David Glasgow, Executive Director of the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at NYU School of Law, posted on LinkedIn: “What does this decision mean for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)? In my opinion, not a ton.” Nevertheless, Padfield cited the decision in NCPPR’s recent anti-DEI proposal presentations. But shareholders didn’t fall for it and continued to vote to reject the anti-DEI proposals.
Attacking Corporate DEI is not new
Trump’s attack on DEI in publicly traded corporations follows the playbook of America First Legal, a nonprofit organization founded in 2021 by current White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller.
AFL has filed multiple complaints and lawsuits against so-called “woke” corporations. In 2024, America First Legal sued Ally Bank for “alleged anti-white, anti-male discrimination.” The legal case between Ally and America First Legal was settled in April; AFL claimed “victory.”
But an Ally spokesperson told Banking Dive that changes to the bank’s language in its SEC (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) filings “do not signify a reduction in our commitment to our caring and inclusive culture.” Currently, Ally Bank maintains its publicly stated commitment to DEI.
Chad Comartin, Ally’s executive director of IT audit said, as shown on Ally’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion web page: “At Ally, DEI isn’t something we just talk about or put on a poster — it’s how we show up every day for our employees, customers and communities. It’s personally rewarding to be part of an organization that prioritizes creating an environment where we all feel seen, heard and valued. DEI is truly the heartbeat of what makes the Ally culture so strong and resilient, and is a huge point of pride and fulfillment in my career.”
AFL maintains a list of Woke Corporations and actions taken against them. AFL issued a press release in February: “America First Legal (AFL) sent a letter to Apple’s CEO and Board of Directors demanding that Apple end its illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, warning that the Board’s recommendation to reject a shareholder proposal to eliminate DEI at the company’s upcoming annual meeting later this month poses significant material risks to investors and shareholders.”
Apple’s Board and shareholders ignored the letter from AFL and voted to reject NCPPR’s anti-DEI proposal by a tally of 98-2 percent at its meeting in February. Apple’s “Inclusion & Diversity” web page says: “”At Apple, we create a culture of collaboration where different experiences, backgrounds, and perspectives come together to make something magical and meaningful. A culture with a North Star of dignity, respect, and opportunity for everyone. Because we’re not all the same. And that remains one of our greatest strengths.
After Apple’s shareholders voted to crush the anti-DEI proposal, the AFL’s Woke Corporations list shows no further actions.
Retreating from DEI poses risks
Like America First Legal, anti-DEI shareholder proposals have also argued that diversity, equity and inclusion programs pose risks to companies.
But a new study released in June by Catalyst in collaboration with the Meltzer Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging at New York University School of Law reveals significant risks associated with retreat from DEI initiatives, including risks posed in four areas: talent, financial, legal, and reputational risks.
Jennifer McCollum, president and CEO of Catalyst wrote: “Inclusion has never been a liability – it’s a competitive advantage and a business imperative. The data proves that organizations committed to the principles of opportunity and fairness behind DEI will be the ones that outperform their peers, retain talent, and build lasting trust.”
David Glasgow messaged me about shareholders voting to reject anti-DEI proposals in 2025: “My main takeaway is that shareholders don’t seem to like activist groups seeking to micromanage the strategic and HR decisions of companies. Large public companies have generally already done audits of their own DEI practices and want to be able to exercise their own business judgment on these topics.”
And business judgement falls squarely in the purview of corporations’ leadership teams. Stacy Hawkins, a professor at Rutgers Law School told Marketplace in February: “‘Costco says this is not about wokeness — this is about business strategy and sound decision making based on market analysis and business performance indicators,’ Hawkins said.
“The company’s policies are also not illegal, said Carliss Chatman, an associate professor at Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law.
“Corporate decisions are protected by what’s known as the ‘business judgment rule’ Chatman said. This means that the director of a corporation is immune from liability if they made decisions in good faith, acted as a ‘reasonably prudent person’ would, and they acted in the company’s best interests upon reasonable belief.
“Basically, the burden of proof to show that a company acted inappropriately is ‘very, very high,’ Chatman said.”
What about the risk to board members if they decide to ditch their company’s DEI programs after shareholders have voted by 98 or 99 percent to keep them? “If they throw them out, then they’ve breached their fiduciary duty, and they could be removed from the board next year,” Behar told me.
DEI enhances merit
Trump’s EO targeting DEI in the private sector called for “restoring merit based opportunity.” And when presenting NCPPR’s anti-DEI proposals at several shareholder meetings, Padfield closed his arguments with: “DEI is out, merit is in.”
But the DEI v. merit myth has been thoroughly debunked by business leaders and studies. And shareholders’ voting shows DEI is in, bigots are out.
Alexis Ohanian, Sr., co-founder of Reddit (market cap $26 billion) told Forbes in April: “I think that the biggest sham is that we have somehow identified these types of [DEI] goals with not being meritocratic,” Ohanian said. “Those of us who’ve been out here building multi billion-dollar companies with an eye towards having diversity, equity, and inclusion, we’re hiring for greatness. That never stopped.”
A study published in June by the MIT Sloan Management Review shows DEI practices can actually promote the goals of merit-based management. The study authors found that “critics of DEI programs view them as undermining meritocracy, but research has continually found that practices supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion are essential for achieving true meritocracy in the workplace. DEI practices can expand companies’ pools of qualified applicants and promote fairer, more objective assessments of merit, to the benefit of all job candidates and employees.”
Shari Dunn, (Impactivize advisory board member) author of the book Qualified, which challenges the false narrative that diversity equals a lack of qualifications, messaged me:
“Let’s be clear: calls from conservatives to shrink DEI programs aren’t just anti-progress—they’re anti-capitalist. The idea that every diverse hire is unqualified, and every white male hire is inherently qualified is both racist and sexist. It ignores the realities of today’s global and multicultural markets. Businesses thrive when they reflect and understand the people they serve.”
In a 2024 article by Meredith Benton and Andrew Behar titled, “Long live the meritocracy! Long live fiduciary duty! Long live DEI!” the authors write: “It’s impossible not to notice that the results of a well-run DEI program are identical to the goals of a meritocracy.”
Trump administration has launched attacks against the private sector
Just days after Walt Disney Company shareholders voted to reject an anti-LGBTQ+ proposal by a tally of 99-1 percent in February, Trump’s Federal Communications Chief (FCC) Brendan Carr announced he was launching an enforcement investigation into Disney and Disney-owned ABC for “promoting invidious forms of DEI discrimination.”
The FCC also blocked Verizon from completing a $20 billion acquisition of Frontier Communications unless it ended its DEI programs. Verizon reportedly complied, and the FCC promptly approved Verizon’s acquisition deal in May.
The Trump administration has deployed similar tactics against law firms, threatening to block their ability to serve clients. Perkins Coie was one of the first law firms targeted by Trump in an Executive Order in March. In it, the president accused the firm of “racial discrimination,” saying, “My Administration is committed to ending discrimination under ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ policies.”
But Perkins Coie refused to capitulate. A spokesperson from Perkins Coie messaged me the day after the White House issued the Executive Order, writing: “We have reviewed the Executive Order. It is patently unlawful, and we intend to challenge it.”
Perkins Coie sued the Trump administration, and three judicial rulings have permanently blocked Trump’s Executive Orders against Perkins Coie and two other firms that chose to fight. Perkins Coie’s “Diversity, Inclusion & Opportunity” web page says: “By embracing diversity, inclusion, and opportunity, we seek to attract and retain the best talent, to facilitate and reward individual excellence, and, in turn, to provide equality of opportunity for our people and outstanding service to our clients.”
But a number of large law firms complied with Trump’s demands, agreeing to provide nearly a billion dollars in free legal services. The American Bar Association, the country’s largest organization of lawyers, sued the Trump administration on June 16 over its efforts to punish law firms.
DEI is thriving overseas
The Trump administration has also targeted DEI programs overseas. I spoke with Paul Klein who wrote for Forbes in May: “Levine Stearns pointed to a recent diplomatic misstep by the Trump administration: letters sent from U.S. embassies in Europe to discourage DEI programming. The backlash from European governments, particularly France, was swift and unapologetic. ‘I’m reminded of what Glinda the Good Witch said to the Wicked Witch of the West: ‘You have no power here. Be gone,’” I told Klein. He reported: “Around the world, however, DEI is thriving. Large European-headquartered companies with massive U.S. operations, like L’Oreal and BMW haven’t appeared to make any changes to their DEI programs.”
In March, HR Brew reported that 77 percent of employers in Japan say they’re sticking with DEI. Japan Times reported in June about Daiwa Securities Group, one of the largest financial services companies in Japan: “Even if the U.S. has adopted an anti-DEI policy, Japan should press ahead and make up for lost time rather than following suit,” said Akihiko Ogino, president and chief executive officer of Daiwa Securities Group, before the start of the Tokyo Pride parade near the bustling Shibuya area.”
DEI is not dead
While attacks on corporate DEI have had an undeniable impact on companies’ initiatives and DEI team members, the widespread narrative saying “DEI is dead” is not accurate.
At the Lead Summit in New York in May, Retail Brew reported about panelists defending DEI for retailers, arguing that diversity and merit go hand-in-hand.
“Panelist Lydia Smith, MBA, who until January had served as chief diversity officer and VP of inclusive marketing at Victoria’s Secret & Co., noted that while earlier in the year retailers who were ending their DEI programs (and the ensuing backlash) dominated the headlines, these days many companies are making the news for rejecting anti-DEI proposals from shareholders.
“’There was a huge response in January, that was one direction, and now we’re actually seeing more and more companies publicize that their shareholders are rejecting anti-DEI proposals,’ Smith said.”
Smith told me in an interview about the impact of shareholder voting on anti-DEI proposals: “I think that people are looking at the situation more holistically and the shareholders are making better business decisions.” She added, about those who are working in the diversity and inclusion arena, “What it does is give people a sense that we are not the only ones. There are others, we won’t be on an island. There is some strength in numbers. And we should stand our ground as it relates to wanting to continue the work.”
The inaccurate narrative suggesting “DEI is dead” has been propagated by conservative activists, amplified by the media, and reinforced by the president himself. Trump said at an April rally in Michigan marking his 100th day in office: “I ended all of the lawless, so-called diversity, equity and inclusion bullshit all across the entire federal government and the private sector.” But he didn’t.
Robby Starbuck posted on X in January about McDonald’s “ending a number of woke DEI policies.” Many headlines soon followed, suggesting the fast food giant had scrapped its diversity and inclusion initiatives.
McDonald’s Executive Vice President, Global Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary Desiree Ralls-Morrison attempted to set the record straight. She posted on LinkedIn about people who “likely only read the media reports, which overwhelmingly got it wrong.” Ralls-Morrison pointed to the company’s Commitment to Inclusion statement and an article for Forbes by Doug Melville: “McDonald’s Didn’t Roll Back Their DEI Initiatives – They Evolved Them.”
But headlines and reporting continued to fuel the misleading narrative that corporate DEI was dead or dying. In February, a CNN graphic misleadingly labeled a group of 13 companies, including McDonald’s, as “U.S. COMPANIES ENDING DEI POLICIES.” Shareholders from more than half of those companies shown on the CNN graphic voted overwhelmingly to reject anti-DEI proposals, including at McDonald’s, where shareholders rejected an anti-DEI proposal in May, 99-1 percent.
Lowe’s is another company that Starbuck claimed to have “flipped,” and which CNN included on its “companies ending DEI policies” graphic. But a Lowe’s spokesperson told the Wall Street Journal in June: “Our commitment to diversity is embedded in our values and core to who we are as a brand.” Lowe’s “Diversity + Inclusion” web page says: “Inclusion Drives Our Success.”
Other companies have likewise evolved their DEI initiatives. A DEI Tracker published by HR Brew shows only a few companies have actually terminated their programs entirely. A study published in January by Resume.org found that seven out of eight companies, or 87 percent, were planning to maintain or augment their DEI programs in 2025. But the study framed its findings as: “1 in 8 companies are scaling back DEI commitments,” fueling a misperception that DEI is dying.
DEI By Any Other Name
Impactivize has published a list of 400+ corporations, brands, and large nonprofits that state their commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives (DEI or by any other name). Diversity, equity and inclusion programs, “whether specifically denominated ‘DEI’ or otherwise,” as Trump wrote in his January 21 EO, continue to proliferate in the private sector.
A June study from Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance found that DEI programs are now widely called by many other names. The study “identified over 30 different phrases now used across the S&P 500 to describe these programs.
“For example, we found the following phrases commonly used to describe diversity programs:
- Belonging and Culture
- Equal Opportunity and Inclusive
- Building a Diverse and Inclusive Workplace
- Inclusion for All
- Corporate Culture and Engagement
- Inclusion, Diversity and Equal Employment and
- Workplace Culture”
As Angela Cheng-Cimini, Head of Human Resources for the Chronicle of Philanthropy (and Impactivize advisory board member) messaged me: “DEI is not dead, but reincarnated.”
Size matters (in voting tallies)
While it’s typical for boards to recommend that shareholders vote to reject outside proposals, and likewise commonplace for shareholders to vote to defeat those proposals, the overwhelming margins of tallies, 98 or 99 percent voting to defeat anti-DEI proposals in 2025, is significant.
Oklahoma Republican state Treasurer Todd Russ announced in February he was bringing anti-DEI shareholder proposals to several corporations including Netflix, Google and lululemon Athletica. Russ wrote in a press release that “the era of DEI” is “about to come to an end.”
Russ’ anti-DEI proposals were rejected by shareholders of Netflix, Google and lululemon athletica by nearly 100 percent of voting shares. Jerry Bowyer of Bowyer Research, the firm that partnered with Russ to shepherd his anti-DEI proposals, told Bloomberg in April: “We can’t be coming in at 1% forever and be taken seriously.”
Behar told me, “If they get a one percent vote, they might say, ‘Maybe what we’re asking is not the right way to go.’” About the overwhelming tallies of shareholder votes, Behar said the margins are “extraordinarily significant.”
Corporate governance analyst Andrew Droste, aka “Mr. CorpGov,” agreed, messaging me about the massive margins of shareholder votes to reject anti-DEI proposals. He said, “These defeats are substantial.” And, as compared with voting margins of other shareholder proposals that were defeated, Droste said, “We’re talking a chasm.”
Behar said, “There can be great hope to see shareholders coming together, unanimously.” The vanguard of free markets and capitalism have declared in 2025: DEI is good for business and here to stay.
Nancy Levine Stearns is founder of nonprofit journalism project Impactivize.org. Donations to Impactivize are 100% tax-deductible and will allow Impactivize to expand its capacity to research and report on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in the private sector.
