Curtis Hill: Constellation Energy Shareholders Deserve Real Accountability on DEI
“In an industry where lives and economic security depend on unflinching competence, Constellation’s leadership should embrace, not resist, clear-eyed financial and risk assessments of its DEI-related spending.”
In the commentary below, Free Enterprise Project Senior Advisor Curtis T. Hill, Jr. — a former Indiana attorney general who also serves as a Project 21 ambassador — shares why Constellation Energy shareholders should be concerned that the company’s board is resisting scrutiny over whether its Diversity, Equity & Inclusion initiatives can be justified according to ROI and NPV calculations.
Read Curtis’s commentary in full below.
Constellation Energy powers America with reliable, emissions-free electricity, including one of the nation’s largest nuclear fleets that keeps the lights on for millions and supports surging data-center demand. In such a high-stakes industry, merit, competence and operational excellence are non-negotiable for safety, reliability, and long-term value creation.
Curtis T Hill Jr
That is why the Free Enterprise Project‘s shareholder proposal for Constellation’s April 28, 2026 annual meeting was both timely and appropriate. The proposal did not call for scrapping every diversity-related effort. It simply required the board to evaluate and report—within one year, at reasonable cost, and without disclosing confidential information—whether Constellation’s DEI initiatives (and any rebranded versions under softer labels like “respect” or “belonging”) are actually authorized and sustained on the basis of rigorous net-present-value (NPV) and return-on-investment (ROI) calculations. That analysis would need to include both opportunity costs and the tangible risks of litigation and reputational backlash from policies that cross into perceived or actual discrimination under the banner of equity.
The concerns were concrete. Constellation carries a “High Risk” rating from the 1792 Exchange for policies that appear to elevate ideology over meritocratic principles. It has boasted a perfect 100% score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index, a metric that often rewards alignment with external activist benchmarks more than demonstrable business results. The company has maintained Employee Resource Groups explicitly organized around race and ethnicity, and it ran a “Journey to Belonging” training program with content that was largely shielded from shareholder scrutiny.
For an energy company in which technical precision and safety protocols can mean the difference between reliable power and costly outages, diverting focus and resources toward race-based groupings or opaque “belonging” sessions risks fostering division rather than unity. It also invites legal exposure at a moment when federal enforcement has sharpened against race- or sex-based preferences in hiring, promotions, training and related programs.
The recent experience of major corporate investors tied to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) illustrates the broader reputational dangers of mission drift into ideologically-driven initiatives. Major financial institutions like Fidelity and Vanguard have paused or halted grants and donor-advised fund support for the SPLC following its federal indictment on fraud, wire fraud, false statements and money laundering charges. The Department of Justice alleges the organization deceived donors by secretly funneling millions to individuals affiliated with the very extremist groups it publicly claimed to dismantle. Such high-profile associations have triggered swift backlash, donor pullbacks and serious questions about governance and transparency—risks that underscore why companies must rigorously assess any programs that drift from core business priorities into contested social engineering.
Constellation’s board opposed our proposal on the grounds that existing oversight and disclosures were sufficient. Yet general assurances about compliance and “robust” processes do not substitute for the disciplined financial analysis shareholders expect for any material expenditure. Boards routinely demand ROI discipline for capital projects, acquisitions and marketing. Human capital programs that carry litigation and reputational downsides in today’s regulatory climate deserve the same scrutiny.
Corporate America has begun a necessary reckoning with DEI overreach. Many firms have quietly scaled back, rebranded or refocused on merit and broad opportunity rather than identity-based approaches. Constellation, with its critical national role and ambitious growth plans, cannot afford to ignore these lessons.
FEP’s proposal advanced a sound governance principle: Transparency and accountability strengthen long-term performance and protect shareholder value.
Merit-based decision-making is not exclusionary. It is the fairest and most effective path to genuine excellence and equal opportunity. In an industry where lives and economic security depend on unflinching competence, Constellation’s leadership should embrace, not resist, clear-eyed financial and risk assessments of its DEI-related spending.
Curtis Hill is senior advisor to the Free Enterprise Project of the National Center for Public Policy Research, a Project 21 ambassador, and former Indiana attorney general.