Protesters have marched in the streets nationwide this summer against the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance immigration policies, but some are moving their money instead of their feet.
Retirement savers and investors opposed to the separation of families at the U.S.-Mexico border — many of whom still haven’t been reunited — are pulling their money out of the companies that help U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement carry out its mission.
“I’m reallocating my investments to make sure I’m not making money off immigrants being detained,” said Kristina King, a 25-year-old public relations professional in New York City. “I wanted to make sure I was not putting my money toward anything that would support that.”
After seeing news reports about children separated from their parents at the border, King discovered that her Roth IRA was invested in the two major publicly-traded private prison operators — The GEO Group, Inc. GEO, -0.52% and CoreCivic, Inc. CXW, +0.36% — that run detention facilities where immigrants are held after entering the country illegally. They’re among many companies that are expected to profit from the Trump administration’s hardline border policies. (ICE did not respond to a request for comment. Administration officials have said the stepped-up enforcement is necessary to battle a “crisis” at the border.)
King moved her money to a “socially responsible” ETF. It doesn’t invest in companies that don’t meet certain ESG (environmental, social and governance) standards, including private prison and tobacco companies and weapons manufacturers. It was the first time King had ever changed her investment allocations based on her political beliefs.
She posted in She Spends, a Facebook FB, +0.74% group about women and money, encouraging others to follow her lead. “If you are investing in anything you need to be aware of where those investments are going,” King told MarketWatch. “Do more than just toss the prospectus out when you get it.”
King isn’t alone. Pat Miguel Tomaino, director of socially responsible investing at Boston-based Zevin Asset Management, said investors have grown increasingly concerned about companies that derive substantial portions of their revenues from prison contracts.
His take: “In the long term, incarceration is a risky industry for investors to be involved in because — essentially — the industry promises growth, which would require greater incarceration, more inequality and greater suffering.”
‘In the long term, incarceration is a risky industry for investors to be involved in because — essentially — the industry promises growth, which would require greater incarceration, more inequality and greater suffering.’ — Pat Miguel Tomaino, director of socially responsible investing, Zevin Asset Management Universities and pension funds are divesting, tooInvestors like King have been inspired by the latest controversy over border policies, but the idea of divesting from the private prison industry is nothing new. It has long been a goal of liberal activists who see private prison companies as profiting off the mass incarceration of low-income blacks and Latinos.
They’ve met with some success among institutional investors. Columbia University became the first U.S. university to pull its money out of private prison companies in 2015 following student protests and the University of California system followed suit a few months later.
When Trump took office, attention shifted to private prison companies’ role in immigration detention. Citing Trump’s border policies, New York City became the first in the country to divest its pension fund from all private prison companies in 2017. This month, New York State’s comptroller announced that the state’s $206.9 billion pension fund will pull out of its direct holdings in private prison companies.
“For nearly two decades, the fund has recognized private prisons is a controversial industry and restricted investments,” Jennifer Freeman, a spokeswoman for comptroller Thomas DiNapoli told the New York Daily News. “The current immigration situation is creating even more risks in their business model, which has consequences for their long term value.”