This Bud Light matter might be a viable case if it could be established that AB-InBev's actions were a violation of fiduciary responsibility by putting management's political agenda ahead of the interests of the shareholders and in doing so created a significant loss in share value...particularly if it can be established that the board was being pressured by certain institutional investors (like BlackRock) to do so.
Of course, from a practical POV, the judge hearing his matter would be a problem if he were politically biased toward the Left...
A counter from the defense would be to present studies showing that they believed that such a course of behavior would increase sales and had some research to indicate that. If so, such a move could be justified as being in the best interest of the shareholders/corporation. Additionally, that’s the thing about ESG loans - they could say that this was being required to keep the free money they were being given, which would also have been in the corporation’s best interests.