Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 04 APRIL 2022

Does Improving CalPERS' Returns Justify State Mandated Discrimination?

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Explore more from Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP

We may learn as early as today whether a pending constitutional challenge to AB 979 will be going to trial in May. AB 979 is California's law requiring publicly held domestic and foreign corporations having their principal executive...

United StatesCorporate/Commercial Law

We may learn as early as today whether a pending constitutional challenge to AB 979 will be going to trial in May.  AB 979 is California's law requiring publicly held domestic and foreign corporations having their principal executive offices in California to have a minimum number of directors from a underrepresented communities. A lawsuit challenging the law as filed on the day that Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 979 into law.   Crest v. Padilla, LA Super. Ct. Case No.  20STCV37513 (Sept. 30, 2020).   Last month, the parties argued dueling motions for summary judgment before Judge Terry Green, who took the matter under submission.  Because a final status conference is scheduled for next Monday, it seems likely that Judge Green will issue his ruling by then.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from