Abortion and the Board.

• Author: Elson, Charles
• Position: EDITOR'S NOTE

There have been few political issues in the last 50 years that have engendered as much anger, emotion and division among the American public as abortion. No matter what position one takes, at least half of the country will oppose it, some with vitriolic intensity. One benefit of working in the corporate governance space has been the avoidance of this issue and its consequent pitfalls --at least until now.

This June, in a much-anticipated ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dobbs case rejected the federal protection of abortion proscribed by an earlier Court in Roe v. Wade--a 50-year precedent--and returned the issue to the individual states to resolve. The public response was predictably split--some rejoicing over the ruling, others reviling it. This was no surprise given abortion's long-standing controversy.

What was surprising, however, was corporate America's reaction. While no CEO, to my knowledge, publicly expressed support for the ruling, a number of large corporations announced that they would protect their employees' right to an abortion, even going so far as to offer to pay for out-of-state travel to receive such a procedure unavailable legally in their home location. Numerous political pundits applauded this step, suggesting that such companies' CEOs were courageous in facing down a dangerous Supreme Court. As citizens of society, corporations and their CEOs, they argued, had a moral and ethical obligation to speak out on important social issues and to become change agents in societal debate.

I completely and thoroughly disagree with this characterization and the actions of such corporate leaders. It is not that I quibble with their personal and social beliefs. Rather, I do not believe the corporations they lead should take positions on the political issues of the day, except those that inspire regulation that directly affects the company's business.

But why shouldn't a business express outrage at a reviled political position--are they not citizens of sorts in our multifaceted society, the critics argue? This sounds appealing on its face, but is very concerning upon deeper examination. Corporations are not living organisms. They are simply a collective and cooperative assembly of individuals/investors, employees, customers and suppliers. As divided on the abortion issue as is the body politic, so are the various individuals that compose these groups. So, for a CEO to direct an organization to take a particular stance here is...