Harvard Students Move Fossil Fuel Stock Fight To Court

mdsolar writes A group of Harvard students, frustrated by the university's refusal to shed fossil fuel stocks from its investment portfolios, is looking beyond protests and resolutions to a new form of pressure: the courts. The seven law students and undergraduates filed a lawsuit on Wednesday in Suffolk County Superior Court in Massachusetts against the president and fellows of Harvard College, among others, for what they call "mismanagement of charitable funds." The 11-page complaint, with 167 pages of supporting exhibits, asks the court to compel divestment on behalf of the students and "future generations."

Comments

Owning stock

[Dan East]

Is it common stock or non-voting? If common stock then I would think they would want the school to have a vote in what the energy companies do. Regardless, if it's a wise investment that is generating profit, then it really doesn't matter. It's not like selling the stock is going to hurt the company or the stock value. I guess some people just can't sleep at night over these kinds of things.

Re:Owning stock

[guises]

It's not like selling the stock is going to hurt the company or the stock value.

Not the stock value, but it can certainly hurt the company. Ending Apartheid is the usual example of a social goal which was aided by divestment. Here's a little blurb explaining how that works.

Standing

[phantomfive]

This quote from the end of the article says it all:

"Lee Goldstein, a clinical instructor in the Harvard Law School legal aid bureau, said that the issue of whether the students were legally qualified to sue, known as standing, could be fatal to the students’ suit, as it was to the earlier suit brought by Mr. Bonifaz and others."

"could be" is a way of putting it politely.

Re:Standing

[schnell]

the issue of whether the students were legally qualified to sue, known as standing, could be fatal to the studentsâ(TM) suit

Precisely this. The whole case is in an idealistic sense understandable - if you are in college and you aren't challenging the real or imagined injustices of the world in some way, you're missing the whole point of being young enough to still be self-absorbed and righteous, but not old enough to be in the real world. But from a practical view, it's just a bunch of overprivileged Harvard kids looking for something to protest and wasting the time of our overburdened court system in the process. My 18-year-old me would applaud them but my current 40-year-old self thinks they should shut the f**k up and go do something useful instead.

Disclaimer: I know several Harvard alumni and count a few of them as my friends. I am probably unfairly biased against Harvard since in my experience these alums are (sorry friends) not noticeably smarter than everyone else - in some cases less so - in a way that justifies a Harvard degree being an automatic ticket to wealth and insider access. Which, unfortunately, it is.

Re:Standing

[richlv]

the publicity alone might be worth the effort.
it's one thing to say "they complained" or "the yes men got them" - "sued" seems to capture news-entertainment people in the usa a bit more

Re:Standing

[Shakrai]

Cut 'em some slack; it's not as though they're attending an Ivy League law school where they'd learn fancy schmancy legal concepts like standing.

Re:Standing

[Oligonicella]

They're hypocrites. If they don't like the policies the college has concerning investment, why are *they* investing in the college instead of finding another? They want to force the college to divest but they don't have the gonads to divest themselves.

Re:Standing

[debrain]

That said, rule #1 of litigating is: You never know what a judge will say.

Litigation is, pretty much, learning a thousand ways why a stranger can, contrary to your expectations, agree or disagree with you.

The question of standing is non-trivial, and can include questions of contract, equity and wrongful interference (tort). Not having thought it out, but purely an example: these kids may argue their reputation tied to the university, and the university using fossil fuels could harm their future prospects. It sounds like a stretch, but then again I know folks that refuse candidates from MIT because of how that institution treated Aaron Schwartz. It's not an argument without basis.

But don't take my word for it. Let's see what happens.

These kids are pushing ahead with a noble cause against a tough institutional defendant with risky litigation for the betterment of the world. I think it's interesting and probably a worthwhile expenditure of their time. They could be on slashdot.

The only thing worse than a lawyer

[thegarbz]

The only thing worse than a lawyer is a law student, they think they can use the courts for anything.

Re:The only thing worse than a lawyer

[Kaenneth]

A lawyers wife.

I'd like to see

[Vinegar Joe]

The entire Harvard faculty, student body and alumni sent to Syria where they can sue ISIS.

In a just world, they'd expel every one of them.

[HBI]

And they'd be justified.

Sell everything

[Anonymous Coward]

There isn't a company on earth that's not both (i) dependent on fossil fuels and (ii) encouraging their use, either directly or indirectly.

Can other students sue this group?

[schneidafunk]

What happens if the investments in fossil fuel companies turn out the be the most profitable and the school loses money?

As Harvard's president said "the endowment is a resource, not an instrument to impel social or political change"

Re:Can other students sue this group?

[phantomfive]

Furthermore, it wouldn't work and shows a lack of understanding about how the stock market works.

Imagine, as a thought experiment, if 90% of the people who owned Exxon stock sold it all. And no one else bought it because of principle. Exxon would continue to function, exactly as it is now, except the remaining 10% would get massive dividends.

So if they want to achieve something, and not just be activists, then they should get an education.

Re:Can other students sue this group?

[DNS-and-BIND]

The students are social justice warriors. Everything is an instrument to impel social or political change to SJWs. Those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

Re:Yeah, man

[HBI]

"Due process" has nothing to do with filing frivolous lawsuits without standing. That's just harassment. They didnt' like something so they are whining. They don't get to waste the college's endowment that way.

Turn off the electricity to the dorms

[sasquatch989]

Every night from 9pm-5am turn off the electricty. Better yet, random rolling blackouts. Let them know what it's like to live somewhere where energy has to be rationed. Kids take it for granted

Re:Turn off the electricity to the dorms

[Chas]

Okay, fossil fuel power makes up the bulk of the generation capacity in the US.

Nuclear power accounts for just under 20% of total power generation in the country.
Fossil fuel power accounts for just over 65% of total power generation in the country.

Renewables?

TOTAL renewable energy in this country comes out at about 13% of total generation capacity.

Hydro being about 66% of that 13% (or 8.58% of total capacity).
Solar? 3% of that 13% (or .0039% of total capacity).

I don't think the country is ready to have two thirds slashed out of its power budget.

Alumni politics.

[khasim]

There are, probably, several alumni who are employed by those companies who would not want to see the publicity of their high prestige alma mater taking a public stand against their business.

Sorry, kids. Part of the attraction of Harvard is the business/political connections it gives you.

Re:Alumni politics.

[Will.Woodhull]

Harvard got into a shitload of trouble in the 1960s when students found, by tracing ownership through layers of flse front corporations, that Harvard University was one the largest and filthiest of Boston's slum lords. Seems they ended up having to mend their ways wrt real estate management or lose some of the endowments and prestige they like to flaunt.

Perhaps this law suit will go the same way. It would benefit the USA and the world in general if a wedge could be driven between academia and Corporate America. Those two should not be in bed together, but there they are, diddling each other under the sheets.

Re:In a just world, they'd expel every one of them

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

No. The appropriate reaction is to toss the suit for lack of merit and standing. Then assign the court cost and the legal costs of the University to the students/plaintiffs.

THat also has the added advantage of teaching the students about money.

Re:BENNETT IS 36!!!

[epyT-R]

Actually, I am relieved.

So you want people living in caves? YOU GO FIRST!

[Chas]

Seriously.

There's one reason this country enjoys the standard of living it has now.

Energy.

You want people swear off coal and oil right now when it makes up over 85% of the total power generated in this country? That's basically asking them to go back to living in caves. To having their kids die of preventable diseases. To going hungry if their crops fail or hunting sucks.

If you think THAT standard of living is so great, YOU GO FIRST. Once you've spent 10 years in your cave and proven it viable for the other 8 billion people on the planet, then, maybe, someone will follow your lead.

Until then, you need to shut the fuck up instead of flapping your gums on a subject you obviously know jack shit about.