LGBT

4th

(105 posts) Fri Dec 6, 2024, 11:34 AM Dec 6

Target must face shareholder lawsuit over Pride backlash, US judge rules

Target must face shareholder lawsuit over Pride backlash, US judge rules
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/target-must-face-shareholder-lawsuit-over-pride-backlash-us-judge-rules/ar-AA1vkWc7

(Reuters) -Target has failed to persuade a judge in Florida to dismiss a lawsuit that accused the retailer of deceiving shareholders after its sales of LGBTQ-themed merchandise for Pride Month sparked a backlash and a customer boycott.

U.S. District Judge John Badalamenti in Fort Myers ruled that the plaintiffs had presented enough information for now to pursue claims that Target misled investors about its efforts to guard against social and political risks.

The lawsuit from investor Brian Craig claims that Target's board focused only on activist groups' calls for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) measures and overlooked potential negative responses to the Pride campaign in May 2023.

Target did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.

America First Legal, the conservative group that filed the lawsuit last year, in a statement on Wednesday called the court ruling a "warning to publicly traded corporations’ boards and management." The group said the risk of DEI programs and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives "cannot be whitewashed with boilerplate language or ignored."

...

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Target must face shareholder lawsuit over Pride backlash, US judge rules (Original Post) 4th Dec 6 OP

so now the "company" has to apologize to the "shareholders" FirstLight Dec 6 #1

You assume every shareholder is rich. Almost all retirement funds hold shares in large corporations, as sinkingfeeling Dec 6 #2

This is only technically a shareholders' lawsuit -- not by any means a majority of shareholders. 4th Dec 6 #5

Once upon a time customers came first with companies. Biophilic Dec 6 #3

They now have a viable threat. TommyT139 Dec 6 #4

FirstLight

(14,305 posts)

1. so now the "company" has to apologize to the "shareholders"

Reply to 4th (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2024, 11:40 AM

Dec 6

For being "inclusive" of the PUBLIC that the store is supposed to serve?

Take note people... it's time for all of us to come for the "shareholders" of all these companies.

Fuck boycotts. Eat.the.Rich.

sinkingfeeling

(53,242 posts)

2. You assume every shareholder is rich. Almost all retirement funds hold shares in large corporations, as

Reply to FirstLight (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 6, 2024, 11:58 AM

Dec 6

do small investors. I bet 3 out of every 5 people you know are shareholders.

Currently, 62% of Americans own stocks, reaching a 20-year high.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/american-stock-ownership-by-share-of-financial-assets/#:~:text=Currently%2C%2062%25%20of%20Americans%20own,reaching%20a%2020%2Dyear%20high.

It's a ridiculous lawsuit that the judge should have dismissed.

4th

(105 posts)

5. This is only technically a shareholders' lawsuit -- not by any means a majority of shareholders.

Reply to sinkingfeeling (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 6, 2024, 02:14 PM

Dec 6

It's a RW Christian "public interest" outfit.

Biophilic

(4,985 posts)

3. Once upon a time customers came first with companies.

Reply to 4th (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2024, 12:51 PM

Dec 6

Businesses without customers don’t didn’t do well. Now it doesn’t matter because the big companies have pushed competition out. Now all that matters is keeping the share holders happy so that the big brass can make huge salaries etc. They believe customers will just keep buying. They’re wrong. When the “peasants” stop buying is the only question.

TommyT139

(750 posts)

4. They now have a viable threat.

Reply to Biophilic (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 6, 2024, 01:23 PM

Dec 6

This will be used to shut down symbols of corporate support for LGBTQ people.

Reply to this discussion