With U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche appointed as acting Attorney General, just days after boasting about his purges of dedicated, nonpartisan, patriotic career law enforcement officials, his boss’s apparent orders are to increase the prosecution of President Trump’s campaign of political retribution. Although the “No Kings” rallies last weekend attracted an estimated 8 million to 9 million protesters, additional voices are still needed to join the growing chorus. These are the voices of business leaders with their preeminent public respect and nonpartisan guardrails.
At key moments of inflection, business leaders have often, if selectively, and even reluctantly, risen as a unified voice of patriotic purpose and moral authority. When Alexis de Tocqueville, the French political philosopher and statesman, visited America and published his 1835–1840 classic Democracy in America, he was surprised by the adaptive, intentional looseness of the laws written during the first century of the United States. He showcased community leaders and especially business leaders as essential forces to verify the truth, fortifying what he called “social capital,” which is as vital as financial capital in strengthening our democracy.
In fact, shortly thereafter, business leaders nationwide rallied behind Abraham Lincoln’s growing effort to preserve a united America and combat slavery. They established Union League Clubs in Philadelphia, New York, Chicago, New Haven, and Boston to promote loyalty to the U.S. government, support Abraham Lincoln’s leadership, and oppose anti-war sentiments. Founded by prominent citizens, these elite clubs financed Union troops, promoted financial support for freed slaves, and supported voter registration, political voice for Black Americans, as well as aid for Black soldiers.
A century later, Martin Luther King Jr. recognized the societal power of business leadership to enhance the Civil Rights Movement, diverting his key lieutenant, Andrew Young, to skip the historic 1963 March on Washington and instead direct Young’s intellect, diplomatic skills, and religious grounding toward meeting with business leaders in Birmingham, Alabama, and Jackson, Mississippi. Dr. King advised Reverend Young, who would later become Atlanta’s first Black mayor and the United States Ambassador to the United Nations, that his ability to engage with business leaders was too important to be diminished as just one of many in large political rallies.
Reverend Young reflected on Dr. King’s wisdom at our 2018 Yale CEO Summit, highlighting the influence of business and explaining that once he gained the support of business leaders, communities were catalyzed into constructive action. He told the 200 corporate leaders present that, in today’s political climate, “I almost trust business more than the church, politics, or anything else I do…There is more freedom, and there is more courage in our free enterprise system, and there is a capacity to rise from all kinds of need.”
Accordingly, in 1962, Ivan Allen, a business leader who served as mayor of Atlanta, ended Jim Crow segregation at City Hall on his first day in office. In 1964, he became the only southern elected official to endorse the Civil Rights Act. That same year, when MLK Jr. accepted the Nobel Peace Prize, business leaders such as Allen, Coca-Cola patriarch Robert Woodruff, and Ralph McGill, publisher of The Atlanta Constitution, organized a banquet to celebrate MLK, to the shock of the white business community. This led to a sellout MLK tribute banquet of 1,500 prominent Georgia business leaders and the labelling of Atlanta as “a city too busy to hate.”
This courageous voice of Atlanta business leadership was in open defiance of the efforts of the director of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, to subvert and discredit MLK. This foreshadowed Mr. Blanche’s recent politicization of the FBI as he bragged at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) of purging FBI agents who did their jobs following court orders to investigate President Trump’s theft of classified government documents and his threat to use ICE agents at polling places this fall.
In a striking departure from the Justice Department’s traditional posture of neutrality, Mr. Blanche used a speech at CPAC to defend the possible deployment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents at polling stations during the 2026 midterms. The remarks underscored a fundamental shift in the department’s priorities and signaled a new readiness to wield federal law enforcement in ways critics warn could intimidate voters and undermine electoral independence.
Mr. Blanche’s remarks were remarkable not for their content alone but for their controversial venue — the latest marker in both political parties’ long march toward the extremes, at least at the federal level. Three weeks ago, we hosted 60 mayors of large and medium-sized cities to discuss how they are navigating the major issues in their communities. The group was equally distributed across the political left and right. Nearly two-thirds expressed concern that ICE or other federal government agencies will be used to intimidate or suppress voters in the midterms. But as federal powers increasingly preempt state and local authority, they worry that the pragmatic, nonpartisan leadership needed to govern communities is becoming less influential.
America’s democratic institutions are failing to hold the center, and the gap is widening. The nation’s political leaders have retreated to the fringes. A media ecosystem engineered for outrage has made nuance commercially unviable. The judiciary has never been more openly politicized in modern memory. While the public has at times responded to breaches of their constitutional rights, efforts remain fragmented and often partisan.
American CEOs are increasingly being pulled into this leadership void. Not because they sought the role, but because the architecture of trust that a functioning democracy requires has buckled, and capitalism, for better or worse, remains one of the few forces with both the reach and the credibility to fill the gap. The pressure they face today goes well beyond managing the disruptions of artificial intelligence or mastering the complexities of reshoring supply chains. It is, at its core, a democratic burden and, by every indication, will only grow heavier in the months ahead — one that has conscripted chief executives into four roles, none of which they chose: advocate, diplomat, community steward, and truth-teller.
The Advocate’s Dilemma
The expanded role of the corporate leader must be understood against this backdrop of institutional failure, rather than the excesses of a single administration. The first role — that of the advocate — has received extensive coverage yet cannot be ignored, considering the repeated public displays of blandishment directed at the leader of the free world. What makes these interactions between the private sector and the White House noteworthy, though, is not merely the frequent lobbying in support of business interests but the elaborate performances necessary to avoid the president’s ire. Some wrongly believe that lavish praise, golden mementos, and investment pledges are the required currency for any deal.
Business leaders have not been perfect. Private discussions could have happened more quickly, and differences in opinion could have been made public sooner. Still, in numerous instances, CEOs responded to the moment: whether by persuading the president to lower tariffs, highlighting the significance of public investment in science and innovation, promoting the independence of the Federal Reserve, criticizing executive actions that resemble state capitalism, or encouraging the de-escalation of tensions between ICE and state officials. The CEOs of 60 major Minnesota companies from Cargill, Best Buy, Land-O-Lakes, and Hormel to Medtronic, CHS, Winnebago, US Bank, Target and 3M, stood with community leaders across sectors to successfully end the violent ICE attacks on peaceful citizens. Still, most have chosen to operate in private, recognizing that public criticism of the president is effective only during real crises.
The Default Diplomats
Both parties have abandoned the diplomatic coherence the moment demands — one consumed by transactionalism, the other by internal division — leaving CEOs as the unlikely voices of reason on U.S. economic policy abroad.
In March, we also convened more than 80 top CEOs at our Yale CEO Caucus for an off-the-record discussion about the most pressing issues confronting their organizations. One year later, tariffs remain a major concern. Many of the executives continue to highlight the direct financial costs borne by domestic enterprises and consumers but remain equally, if not more, concerned about those indirect effects that are not easily quantified and receive less coverage … During a survey conducted at the event, 80% of CEOs believe the U.S. has become an unreliable trading partner due to tariffs. Worried about the potential consequences, some have made considerable efforts — traversing the globe — to mend relationships with foreign ministers, trade unions, suppliers, and customers and to demonstrate the business community’s commitment to mutually beneficial trade despite remarks and actions by government officials. As the primary points of contact with no political obligations to international leaders, the meetings frequently transition into delicate discussions of public opinion on topics such as democracy, capitalism, immigration, or geopolitics.
That CEOs have become the de facto ambassadors of American economic and democratic values is not a testament to corporate statesmanship but a reflection of how far institutional credibility has eroded.
The Steward Steps in Where Government Steps Back
Domestically, business leaders have been caught between a President Trump testing the limits of executive authority and states believing their sovereignty has been violated. Their responses to previous crises — such as exiting the president’s advisory council over his comments on the 2017 Charlottesville rallies, affirming the 2020 presidential election results, condemning the January 6th insurrection, and criticizing a 2021 Georgia law that reduced voter access — were serious, but each was geographically limited or addressable through state and local channels. Furthermore, unlike during the first Trump administration, the president now has the confidence from experience to wield executive powers in ways previously unthinkable and is surrounded by senior cabinet officials unwilling to challenge him.
The current moment, therefore, is unlike anything seen since the Civil Rights Era. ICE activities and political attacks on legal immigrants have been authorized by the highest authority in the U.S. They are nationwide, fast-moving, and enduring.
Leaders of major store chains have had to develop ICE rapid response plans with designated teams, operating protocols, and emergency benefits for those at risk. Employees on visas are once again being told to avoid leaving the country amid uncertainty about changing immigration policies and procedures. Remote work policies have been extended to employees facing family emergencies related to immigration issues. CEOs have simultaneously delivered messages that acknowledge the pain and fear felt across communities and offer resources for support.
These are not tools that belong in a corporate leader’s operational playbook, but products of necessity arising from the absence of reliable governance.
The Truth-Teller’s Burden
Identifying fact versus fiction has always been difficult in politics. President Trump’s early adoption and adept use of social media made it more challenging during his first term. Now, however, social media is the primary tool elected officials use to communicate with voters — which has made the problem endemic. While counting the president’s fallacies has become routine, the ideological subservience of his senior-most cabinet members and advisors this term has given the public reason to second-guess statements and data issued by them or their offices.
Chief executives have had to combat claims linking autism to pain relief medication, reassert the economic importance of legal immigrants, and defend the value of healthy trade partnerships. At our CEO Caucus, many expressed unease about the potential effects of misinformation spreading through official public channels. In response to another survey question, 86% of business leaders are concerned about the lack of public support for investment in science, research, and innovation.
When the credibility of public data is routinely called into question, and elected officials offer no reliable corrective action, the burden of truth-telling falls on whoever retains the public’s trust. Increasingly, that is the corner office rather than the Capitol.
Conscripted, Not Elected
The question often posed to us is why business leaders, specifically, have emerged as the ones required to shoulder this burden. The answer is structural, rooted in the U.S.’s unique capitalist system. CEOs occupy a position that no elected official commands, accountable to employees, customers, and shareholders who identify as Democrats, Independents, and Republicans alike. Reflexive partisanship is not just politically unwise but operationally untenable. They operate on a national scale, giving them a reach that transcends the geographic or ideological constituencies that constrain most political actors. And unlike institutions whose credibility has become a casualty of the current moment, most business leaders have earned public respect through careers visibly built on performance instead of patronage.
The responsibilities placed on American CEOs have never been more expansive, nor more consequential. As advocates, diplomats, community stewards, and truth-tellers, they have periodically, reluctantly, and triumphantly, stepped into a vacuum that our traditional democratic institutions have so far failed to fill.
As the nation’s attention turns toward the midterms and, inevitably, the 2028 presidential race, Congress, the courts, and the media will grow further entangled in the tribal rituals of election season — leaving the private sector as one of the few remaining sources of stability, credibility, and continuity.
Business leaders are not politicians and fear “the slippery slope” of pressures to speak to every social issue, diverting them from their day jobs. However, they believe in protecting the fabric of American democracy from those seeking to unravel it into divisive threads. Angry, balkanized, hostile communities with shattered trust in American institutions — from courts to free elections — undermine the social capital needed for free enterprise to prosper. Hopefully this will be another of those rare moments where U.S. business leaders rise to the rescue of their nation.
No one talks about a slippery slope in a hospital ER, as they practice triage, picking their priorities. CEOs do the same. When cynics advise to CEOs, “stay in your lane,” we reply “what is that lane, the breakdown lane?”
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
