Texans deserve honesty about who is trying to strangle the industries that keep the lights on and food on our tables. Unfortunately, the recent decision to remove BlackRock from Texas’s list of energy boycotters was based on little more than press releases and wishful thinking.

BlackRock would like policymakers and the public to believe it has suddenly reformed its ways. That it no longer bullies companies into surrendering to radical climate demands. That it has embraced a newfound respect for the fossil fuels that power Texas and feed America. But a close look at BlackRock’s own documents tells a different story: The war on affordable and reliable energy continues.

Recommended Stories

• Congress must finish the job to end Medicaid money laundering
• The One Big Beautiful Bill Act and Trump’s trade policy will do what ‘Bidenomics’ never could
• NPR and PBS brought defunding on themselves

When Texas passed SB 13 in 2021, a model policy I helped craft, it did so for a reason. The law bars state entities from doing business with financial companies that take any action to penalize or economically harm fossil fuel producers or impose environmental standards beyond what federal and state laws require. It was a clear, necessary stand against the woke finance machine.

Yet despite this law, BlackRock was quietly dropped from the state’s boycott list after claiming it had pulled back from climate alliances. Never mind that BlackRock itself admitted its departure from the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative “doesn’t change how we manage portfolios.” In other words, the same discriminatory practices just under a different banner.

The evidence is overwhelming. BlackRock’s U.S. voting guidelines still demand that companies adopt “science-based” emissions targets. That’s a polite way of insisting on net-zero policies that would all but erase fossil fuel use within 25 years. Under the widely accepted definitions of “science-based,” this means companies are expected to slash emissions from electricity and heat generation to near-zero by mid-century. If that isn’t an attempt to impose climate mandates far beyond any legal requirement, what is?

It gets worse. BlackRock still pressures companies to churn out reams of climate disclosures modeled on the SEC’s failed proposal — regulations so burdensome the SEC admitted they would cause “significant harm” to the economy. In practice, these demands amount to a shakedown: Comply with our climate edicts or watch your board seats vanish. In 2024 alone, BlackRock voted against 127 directors for failing to meet these unrealistic expectations.

It also continues to back shareholder resolutions that target fossil fuels and the Texas ranchers who rely on them. For example, BlackRock voted for a Berkshire Hathaway resolution demanding net-zero electricity — effectively the elimination of natural gas and coal. And in a particularly absurd twist, it supported proposals at Cracker Barrel, Denny’s, Jack in the Box, and Wingstop to force emissions targets modeled on McDonald’s supply chain. These net-zero goals call for electrifying farm machinery, ditching nitrogen fertilizer, and cutting beef consumption in half. The consequences for Texas agriculture and cattle ranching would be devastating.

And let’s not forget BlackRock’s unrepentant pledge to divest from thermal coal. That policy has been on the books since 2020 and remains today. No amount of public relations spin can disguise the reality: BlackRock is still boycotting legal energy production.

This is not conjecture or conspiracy theory. It is documented in BlackRock’s own stewardship reports, proxy voting records, and policy guidelines. And it is exactly the type of conduct Texas law was written to stop.

What’s even more remarkable is that Texas removed BlackRock from the boycott list while the state attorney general is suing it for collusion to suppress fossil fuel production. At a minimum, this litigation should have prompted caution and further scrutiny, not a clean bill of health.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. Texas is an energy superpower, and our prosperity depends on the freedom to produce, transport, and consume reliable food and fuels. When Wall Street giants such as BlackRock weaponize trillions of dollars to kneecap these industries, families pay the price through higher electric bills, higher food costs, and diminished economic opportunity.

Texans aren’t asking for special treatment. We’re demanding a level playing field and accountability for companies that say one thing in press releases and do another behind closed doors. The Texas comptroller’s office owes taxpayers a transparent explanation of how BlackRock’s record was evaluated, what evidence justified removal from the list, and whether any independent verification occurred.

CHEVRON’S CONDUCT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH TRUMP’S AGENDA

It’s time for policymakers to remember why SB 13 passed in the first place: to defend our energy economy from activists who treat fossil fuels as a sin to be purged. BlackRock hasn’t abandoned that ideology. It has simply learned to disguise it.

Texas has the law, the evidence, and the moral clarity to hold BlackRock accountable. Now, it must find the will.

Jason Isaac is the founder and CEO of the American Energy Institute. He previously served four terms in the Texas House of Representatives.