Litigation

Cal. Litig. 2022, VOLUME 35, ISSUE 2

THE CREST OPINIONS: IMPEDING LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO DIVERSIFY CORPORATE BOARDS

Written by Rachel Naor*

It’s no secret that most directors on corporate boards in the United States are white men — in 2021, approximately 60% of the board seats at S&P 500 companies were occupied by white men. Several states have tried to address this issue by enacting legislation aimed at increasing board diversity. California was the first state to impose gender diversity on boards when it passed Women on Boards (Senate Bill (SB) 826) in 2018, mandating corporations with executive offices in California to have at least one woman on their board by December 2019 and to add more women in subsequent years. In 2020, California expanded its efforts to increase board member diversity and passed Assembly Bill (AB) 979, mandating those same corporations include at least one director from an underrepresented community by December 31, 2021.

In April 2022, L.A. Superior Court Judge Terry Green ruled that AB 979 was unconstitutional when he granted the plaintiff’s summary judgment motion. The following month, Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis of the same court determined that SB 826 was unconstitutional following a six-week trial. In addition to being a setback to the efforts in California, these rulings pose new obstacles to other existing and contemplated legislation designed to increase board diversity.

WHAT ARE BOARD DIVERSITY LAWS?

Join CLA to access this page

Join

Log in

Forgot Password

Enter the email associated with you account. You will then receive a link in your inbox to reset your password.

Personal Information

Select Section(s)

CLA Membership is $99 and includes one section. Additional sections are $99 each.

Payment