The WSJ observes:
Companies have long sought to influence policies that affect their business, and rightly so. They have the First Amendment right to petition the government. And as the reach of the state has grown, the success or failure of a firm or industry can depend on defeating political predators in Washington or state capitals. We wish it were otherwise, but this is today’s reality.
The CEO intervention into Georgia election law is different. It concerns a matter that doesn’t directly affect Coca-Cola or Delta Airlines, to cite two companies whose executives condemned the new law. The CEOs are instead injecting themselves into a heated debate over election law and the tension between ballot access and integrity.
One wonders whether there is some neutral principle by which CEOs are choosing which political fights in which to intervene? Or are the CEOs simply carrying the Democratic Party's water? The WSJ claims it is the latter.
I have no opinion about the Georgia election law. It's not my field and there seems to be a huge amount of fake news out there on both sides.
But I do wonder whether CEOs have become social justice warriors or are just greenwashing. In either case, however, it's interesting that the CEOs seem unconcerned with the reactions of the 74 million-plus folks who voted for Donald Trump. Do CEOs assume only the woke pay attention to what companies do? Or are they content to lose those customers?