Systemic Injustice and ESG Investing: The Boston Settlement and the Rising Demand for Accountability

The 1989 Boston murder case, which saw two Black men—Alan Swanson and Willie Bennett—wrongly implicated in the death of Carol Stuart, has resurfaced in 2025 as a stark reminder of systemic injustice and the growing demand for accountability in both corporate and governmental institutions. On September 24, 2025, Boston announced a $150,000 settlement with Swanson and Bennett, a payout widely criticized as inadequate given the emotional and financial toll of their wrongful accusationBlack men wrongly linked to 1989 Boston murder get $150,000 settlement, Reuters^[1]. This case, now over three decades old, intersects with contemporary debates about ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) investing, where corporate and governmental accountability are increasingly scrutinized as critical components of sustainable finance.

Systemic Bias and the Cost of Injustice

The 1989 case exposed deep-seated racial biases in Boston's law enforcement and media ecosystems. Charles Stuart's fabricated account of a Black assailant led to the aggressive interrogation of Black men in the Mission Hill neighborhood, despite a lack of evidence linking them to the crime30 years after Stuart case, Boston still healing, Commonwealth Beacon^[2]. The fallout included a citywide crisis of trust, with racial tensions spiking and public confidence in institutions eroding. The 2025 settlement, while a belated acknowledgment of wrongdoing, underscores the long-term financial and social costs of systemic injustice.

Such cases are not isolated. In Chicago, for example, police misconduct settlements have cost taxpayers over $384 million between 2019 and 2023, with notorious officers like Jon Burge and Reynaldo Guevara linked to wrongful convictions that drained public resourcesWrongful Convictions – A Billion Dollar Liability For States, Forbes^[3]. Similarly, Philadelphia taxpayers faced a $60 million burden from police misconduct lawsuits in 2023 alonePhiladelphia Taxpayers Face $60 Million Bill for Police Misconduct Settlements, Davis Vanguard^[4]. These figures highlight a pattern: systemic failures in law enforcement not only inflict human harm but also create substantial fiscal liabilities for municipalities.

ESG Investing and the Accountability Imperative

The financial implications of these cases are now influencing ESG investment strategies. Investors are increasingly factoring in corporate and governmental accountability—particularly in policing and criminal justice reform—as part of their social governance assessments. For instance, the Innocence Project's advocacy for legislative reforms, such as police decertification and prosecutorial transparency, aligns with ESG principles of addressing systemic inequitiesTransforming Systems - Innocence Project^[5]. ESG funds are also scrutinizing companies that contract with law enforcement agencies, pushing for transparency in how public funds are allocated.

Regulatory scrutiny has further amplified this trend. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has taken action against firms misrepresenting their ESG credentials, such as Invesco Advisers, which was fined $17.5 million for overstating the proportion of its assets under management that integrated ESG factorsSEC Fines Invesco $17.5 Million for Misleading ESG Investing Claims, ESG Today^[6]. This enforcement reflects a broader demand for authenticity in ESG claims, with investors prioritizing tangible reforms over symbolic gestures.

The ESG Litigation Landscape

The rise in ESG-related litigation underscores the financial risks of neglecting accountability. In 2025, over 2,700 ESG lawsuits were filed globally, more than double the number since 2020Greenwashing Crackdowns and ESG Lawsuits: What 2025 Means for Corporate Accountability, PS CG Global^[7]. These cases span greenwashing claims, such as Delta Air Lines' lawsuits over misleading “carbon neutral” marketing, to demands for transparency in police misconduct settlements. For example, the $120 million jury award to John Fulton and Anthony Mitchell in Chicago—linked to a wrongful conviction—has drawn attention to how municipalities manage liability and reform systemic issuesWrongful Convictions – A Billion Dollar Liability For States, Forbes^[8].

Investors are also leveraging their influence to push for change. In Democratic-controlled states, ESG legislation has mandated corporate board diversity and public accountability in state contractsEnacted state ESG legislation by trifecta status, 2020-2025, Ballotpedia^[9]. Conversely, Republican-led states have resisted such measures, highlighting the political polarization around ESG principles. This divergence creates a fragmented regulatory environment, complicating investment strategies but also reinforcing the importance of localized accountability efforts.

Conclusion: Accountability as a Pillar of ESG

The Boston settlement and similar cases illustrate a growing consensus: systemic injustice is not only a moral failing but also a financial liability. For ESG investors, accountability in policing and criminal justice reform is no longer a peripheral concern but a core component of risk assessment. As regulatory scrutiny intensifies and litigation increases, companies and governments that fail to address these issues risk reputational damage, legal penalties, and loss of investor confidence.

The 1989 Boston case, though decades old, remains a cautionary tale. It reminds us that justice delayed is justice denied—and that ESG investing must evolve to hold institutions accountable for both historical and ongoing harms.