CORPORATE BOARDROOMS AND THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE: A GENDER DIVERSITY MARRIAGE MADE IN CORPORATE GOVERNANCE HEAVEN

A corporate boardroom is stereotypically viewed as a "boys' club." This stereotype, however, is not completely unfounded. On average, Fortune 250 companies elected the first woman onto their boards in 1985. In 2018, women accounted for about half the world's population but not even a quarter of Fortune 500 companies' directorships. Countries across the world are prioritizing this issue and promoting more diverse directorships. In 2018, California became the first U.S. state to implement a gender-based quota for corporate directorships with Senate Bill 826. In August 2019, activist group Judicial Watch sued California over the constitutionality of Senate Bill 826. Judicial Watch argued the gender-based classification violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. After exploring the importance of gender diversity on corporate boards in Part I, this Comment argues in Part II that the gender-based quota created by Senate Bill 826 is unconstitutional and runs afoul of the Internal Affairs Doctrine. Part III of this Comment recognizes action must be taken to address the lack of female directors and discusses potential state-based, shareholder-based, and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission-based solutions. This Comment concludes by suggesting that the National Football League's Rooney Rule coupled with a comply or explain requirement is the most legally sound and effective solution to address the lack of truly gender-diverse boards and to improve progress toward gender diversity on corporate boards in the United States.