1792 Insights
The 1792 Exchange is committed to delivering sharp, data-driven analysis of corporate America’s political entanglements. Discover what investors, executives, and concerned citizens should know regarding why businesses should return to neutral, mission-focused operations.
Gender Surgery for Minors Faces a Legal Reckoning
Last year, a federal court in Washington State ruled that Premera Blue Cross unlawfully discriminated when it refused to cover elective double mastectomies for two young girls. The decision read like a harsh warning to every employer: exclude gender-transition procedures for children from your health plan and risk an Affordable Care Act discrimination claim. But the story doesn’t end there. In July 2026, the United States filed a brief urging the Ninth Circuit to reject that court’s misguided reasoning. In a 39-page brief supporting Premera’s appeal, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division argues that declining to fund these elective sex-denying surgeries for minors is not sex discrimination. “Far from being discrimination on the basis of sex,” the brief states, “this sensible policy is rooted in biological reality, developmental psychology, and medical diagnosis.” The brief anchors its argument in the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in United States v. Skrmetti, arguing that “regulating medical procedures on the basis of diagnosis does not automatically amount to discrimination on the basis of sex.” Premera covers a mastectomy for a teenage boy with gynecomastia and for a girl with breast cancer but declines to cover the same surgery when it is performed on healthy adolescents—boys and girls alike. The distinction, the brief argues, is …
Schwab and Walmart get it right on not covering “gender transitions” for minors
Consider the millions of working parents who show up every day at their jobs, work hard to support their families and pay into their company’s healthcare plans. They trust that their premiums will fund genuine medical care, not repeat one of medicine’s darkest mistakes. In our not-so-distant past, frontal lobotomies were performed to “treat” psychiatric conditions — despite limited evidence of effectiveness. The operations had devastating long-term effects and no proven medical benefit. It was not long before the world realized what a serious mistake was being committed and put a stop to this abusive “treatment.” Today’s unproven “gender-affirming” interventions on minors use surgery, hormones and puberty blockers to address a mental health condition with similarly irreversible consequences: permanent sterilization, the removal of healthy organs and lifelong physical and emotional damage. No responsible modern healthcare plan would cover frontal lobotomies, yet many quietly fund these experimental sex-denying procedures on children. Let us not repeat that shameful history on our gender-dysphoric youths. This is not healthcare. These are not medically necessary procedures. These are not minor adjustments or reversible treatments. They are costly, permanently damaging experiments on our children, who lack the maturity and legal capacity to count the cost of …
550+ Companies Covering Sex-Denying Procedures for Minor Dependents
According to February 2026 data from the Human Rights Campaign, 550+ companies provide health insurance coverage for transgender medical interventions, including puberty blockers, hormones, and surgical procedures, to covered minor dependents through their employee health plans. HRC reports this information after a corporate representative uses an online HRC portal to upload, or affirm a previously uploaded copy of, the company’s Summary Plan Description (SPD) or Summary of Material Modification (SMM) that explicitly shows coverage for transition-related care. The representative must also upload a copy of the company’s applicable clinical guidelines (medical policy). These companies range from major financial institutions and law firms to retailers, insurers, and tech giants. Shareholders, customers, parents, and employees deserve to know where their companies stand. 1792 Exchange calls on every company on this list to adopt clear protections for minor dependents in their healthcare plans and get back to business. A&O Shearman Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation Billtrust Box Inc. Griffith Foods Group Hanover Insurance Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey HSBC Holdings Linklaters Mayer Brown MERGE Moderna Neuberger Berman Group NTT DATA Services NTT Global Data Centers Americas PGA TOUR Publicis Health Publicis Media Sony Interactive Entertainment Sony Music Sony Pictures Steptoe Sutherland Global …
Professionals Are Betting Less on Identity Politics for Career Advancement
“It’s interesting to see activist groups openly confess to exploiting sexual and gender identity to get ahead in the workplace. But even more interesting is that the most radical ideologues are now admitting that the spell is wearing off,” 1792 Exchange executive vice president Greg Scott told the DCNF. The 1792 Exchange is a nonprofit whose mission “is ‘helping businesses get back to business’ by influencing American companies to advance principles including free speech, freedom of religion, and free enterprise,” according to its website. “Many companies have seen that taking sides in political battles presents few benefits and carries intolerable reputational risk. It’s not speculation or mere vibing to say that businesses are increasingly getting back to business and leaving the culture wars behind,” Scott said. Scott told the DCNF that 65% of Fortune 500 companies stopped participating in the Human Rights Campaign (HRC)’s Corporate Equality Index survey in one year. He also said that HRC lost half its annual dinner sponsors in one year. “These are just two indicators that many businesses are renewing their commitment to serve all their customers, shareholders, and employees, rather than bow the knee to special interests,” Scott said. The full article can be found in Daily Caller.
Risks Associated with HRC Foundation Partnership
What Is the Human Rights Campaign Foundation (HRCF)? The Human Rights Campaign Foundation (HRCF) is the educational and charitable affiliate of the Human Rights Campaign, operating as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. HRCF advances LGBTQ+ priorities through research, resources, benchmarking tools, programs, and public education intended to shape policies and practices across workplaces, municipalities, healthcare systems, schools, and other institutions.1,2 What Does the HRCF Do? Administers an annual Corporate Equality Index (CEI), which evaluates companies based on workforce protections, benefits, culture, and outreach and engagement related to LGBTQ+ issues.3–5 Administers an annual Municipal Equality Index (MEI), which evaluates cities based on their non-discrimination laws, benefits, contractor standards, municipal services, law enforcement, and local leadership related to LGBTQ+ issues.6–8 Administers a biannual Healthcare Equality Index (HEI), which evaluates hospitals and healthcare facilities based on their training, patient services, employee benefits and policies, community engagement, and responsible citizenship related to LGBTQ+ issues.9,10 Operates a Welcoming Schools program that provides LGBTQ+ training, lesson plans, booklists, in-person training/programming, and other resources for youth-serving professionals to create “gender-inclusive” schools and support transgender and non-binary students.11–15 Risks of Corporate Partnership Partisan Alignment Risk HRCF’s programs promote policy frameworks and institutional standards widely associated with progressive policy priorities.16,17 …
Risks Associated with HRC Corporate Partnership
What Is the Human Rights Campaign (HRC)? The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), functioning as a 501(c)(4), is the largest LGBTQ+ advocacy organization in the United States. Founded as a political action committee in 1980 to support pro-LGBTQ+ candidates, it has since expanded into programs, research, campaigns, lobbying, and mobilization to support and advance pro-LGBTQ+ policies, legislation, and officials.1 What Does the HRC Do? LGBTQ+ issue advocacy and lobbying for LGBTQ+ policy and legislation at the federal, state, and local levels.2 Electoral engagement aimed at mobilizing pro-LGBTQ+ voters and supporters to elect pro-LGBTQ+ leaders.3 Institutional advocacy to advance LGBTQ+ policies and practices in major systems, including schools, workplaces, hospitals, and communities.4 Risks of Corporate Partnership Partisan Alignment Risk HRC is a 501(c)(4) advocacy organization involved in lobbying and electoral activity, advancing policy priorities aligned with the Democratic Party platform.5–7 Corporate sponsors have been accused of taking political sides through association.8 HRC’s endorsements overwhelmingly favor Democratic candidates, creating a partisan perception.9 HRC’s affiliated PAC overwhelmingly funds Democratic candidates, including presidential candidates.10–12 Corporate support for the HRC, particularly when not balanced by comparable support for organizations promoting conservative or traditional values, could be perceived as political side-taking.13 Controversial Policy Advocacy HRC’s advocacy extends …