US pipeline case heads to court in high-stakes free speech fight
Nearly a decade after activists led one of the largest anti-pipeline protests in US history, the fight shifts to court as Energy Transfer sues Greenpeace for $300 million in a case with far-reaching free speech implications.
At the heart of the lawsuit is the Dakota Access Pipeline, which transports fracked crude oil from North Dakota to refineries and on to markets worldwide.
Contentious from its inception, the project faced fierce opposition from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, which called it the "Black Snake" and warned of dire threats to ancestral lands.
Beginning in 2016, protests and legal challenges sought to halt construction. By 2017, hundreds had been arrested and injured, prompting United Nations concerns over Indigenous sovereignty violations.
Though the oil has flowed for years, pipeline operator Energy Transfer continues to pursue Greenpeace, accusing the group of leading the protests, conspiring to commit crimes, inciting violence, and defaming the company.
Critics call the lawsuit a clear example of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), designed to silence dissent and drain resources.
"Big Oil is trying to send a message to us, and they're trying to silence Greenpeace as well as the wider movement," Sushma Raman, interim executive director of Greenpeace told AFP.
"But let us be clear, the limited interventions that Greenpeace entities took related to Standing Rock were peaceful, lawful, and in line with our values of non-violence and our work for a green and peaceful future."
- A legal war to 'send a message' -
Energy Transfer denies that it is aiming to stifle free speech.
"Our lawsuit against Greenpeace is about them not following the law," the company said in a statement to AFP.
"We support the rights of all Americans to express their opinions and lawfully protest. However, when it is not done in accordance with our laws, we have a legal system to deal with that. Beyond that we will let our case speak for itself."
In 2017, Energy Transfer sued Greenpeace in federal court, invoking the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) -- a law typically used to prosecute organized crime.
CEO Kelcy Warren stated in interviews that his "primary objective" was not financial compensation but to "send a message" -- going so far as to suggest that activists "should be removed from the gene pool."
That case was tossed out by a federal court, but Energy Transfer quickly refiled at the state level in North Dakota -- one of the minority of US states without anti-SLAPP protections.
Waniya Locke, a member of Standing Rock Grassroots, pushed back at the idea Greenpeace led the movement.
"I want it to be very clear that there were no NGOs that started or organized our resistance. And it was matriarch-led. It was led by women who stood strong, who stood on the riverbanks unarmed."
- Greenpeace fights back in Europe -
Greenpeace is fighting back, becoming this month the first group to test the European Union's anti-SLAPP directive by suing Energy Transfer in the Netherlands.
"We are asking the district court of Amsterdam to declare that ET acted wrongfully by engaging in an abusive process," Greenpeace International General Counsel Kristin Casper told AFP.
The case seeks damages with interest and demands that Energy Transfer publish the court's findings on its website.
Similar lawsuits from fossil fuel companies, including Shell and Total, have targeted Greenpeace in recent years. "The good news is that when we fight back, we win," said Casper, citing the dismissal of TotalEnergies v Greenpeace France last year.
More than 400 organizations, along with public figures such as Billie Eilish, Jane Fonda, and Susan Sarandon, have signed an open letter supporting Greenpeace.
"If Energy Transfer is successful in imposing a large monetary penalty on Greenpeace, that would encourage other companies to take similar actions and could significantly chill protests over a variety of issues -- not just climate change," Michael Gerrard, an environmental law professor at Columbia University told AFP.
ia/bgs
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New environmental guidance published for halted North Sea oil and gas projects
Major North Sea oil and gas projects halted by a Supreme Court ruling will be able to reapply for consent after the Government published new environmental guidance. The Supreme Court ruled last year that emissions created by burning fossil fuels should be considered when granting planning permission for new drilling sites, in a case that focused on an oil well in Surrey but reverberated through the energy sector. A challenge brought by environmental campaigners in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, over approval for the Rosebank oil field north-west of Shetland and the Jackdaw gas field off Aberdeen, was upheld at the Court of Session in Edinburgh in January. Greenpeace and Uplift had argued the UK Government and North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) had acted unlawfully when granting consent to the projects, as environmental impact assessments did not take into account downstream emissions resulting from the burning of the extracted fuels. The Government has now published new guidance on how the environmental impacts of oil and gas – including their downstream 'scope three' emissions created when the fossil fuels are burned – are included in assessments. Officials said offshore developers will now be able to submit applications for consent to extract fossil fuels in oil and gas fields that are already licensed, which includes Rosebank and Jackdaw. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband will 'consider the significance of a project's environmental impact, while taking into account and balancing relevant factors on a case-by-case basis – such as the potential economic impact and other implications of the project', the Government said. Labour has previously ruled out issuing new oil and gas licences for the North Sea, but Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said the fuels will be needed for decades to come and indicated he would not 'interfere' with existing licences. But the green groups behind the legal challenge to the Rosebank and Jackdaw schemes said they were incompatible with the UK's climate commitments to curb the greenhouse gas emissions driving rising temperatures and dangerous weather extremes. The International Energy Agency has previously said no new fossil fuel projects should be developed beyond existing fields if the world is to stay below 1.5C of global warming, beyond which increasingly dangerous and irreversible impacts of climate change will be felt. Energy minister Michael Shanks said: 'This new guidance offers clarity on the way forward for the North Sea oil and gas industry, following last year's Supreme Court ruling. 'It marks a step forward in ensuring the full implications of oil and gas extraction are considered for potential projects and that we ensure a managed, prosperous, and orderly transition to the North Sea's clean energy future, in line with the science. 'We are working with industry, trade unions, local communities and environmental groups to ensure the North Sea and its workers are at the heart of Britain's clean energy future for decades to come – supporting well-paid, skilled jobs, driving growth and boosting our energy security.' The Government pointed to £200 million in funding for a project to capture and store carbon in Aberdeenshire and a pilot in Aberdeen, along with Cheshire, Lincolnshire and Pembrokeshire, to help workers access jobs in new clean energy industries. Tessa Khan, executive director of Uplift, said: 'The new rules mean that oil and gas companies will finally be forced to come clean over the enormous harm they are causing to the climate.' She argued Rosebank would not lower fuel bills or boost energy independence as most of the oil would be exported, and tax breaks would mean the public would cover most of the costs of development. She also said the extreme weather the UK is experiencing 'must be a wake-up call for this Government to stand up to the oil and gas firms'. Greenpeace UK head of climate Mel Evans said: 'It's only right for the Government to take into account the emissions from burning oil and gas when deciding whether to approve fossil fuel projects currently pending. 'Since Rosebank and other drilling sites will pump out a lot of carbon while providing little benefit to the economy and no help to bill payers, they should fail the criteria ministers have just set out. She said approving the projects would be a 'political sleight of hand' that would benefit oil giants while leaving the UK hooked on fossil fuels. 'Real energy security and future-proofed jobs for energy workers can only come through homegrown, cheap renewable energy, and that's what ministers should focus on,' she urged.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
New charges accuse Bolsonaro of running spy ring from Brazil's presidential palace
Federal police have formally accused Brazil's former far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, of presiding over an illegal spying network which allegedly snooped on political rivals, journalists and environmentalists during his administration. Bolsonaro is already facing the prospect of jail time over his alleged role in masterminding a military coup plot designed to help him keep power after losing the 2022 election to the leftwing veteran Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. There is broad consensus among analysts that Bolsonaro's conviction is a foregone conclusion and the 70-year-old populist is expected to face arrest in the coming months once a supreme court trial concludes. The latest accusations relate to a two-year federal police investigation into suspicions that a 'parallel' intelligence agency was set up during Bolsonaro's 2019-23 administration in order to monitor those considered government foes. On Tuesday, police accused Bolsonaro's alleged former spy chief, Alexandre Ramagem – who ran Brazil's intelligence agency, Abin, from 2019 to 2022 – of running the clandestine operation and accused more than 30 others of being involved, including the president's politician son Carlos Bolsonaro. The news website G1 said investigators had concluded that under Bolsonaro members of Abin 'formed a criminal organization in order to monitor people and public authorities, invading mobile phones and computers'. Some of the information gathered was allegedly provided to a covert social media team that operated within the presidential palace and allegedly used illegally collected information as ammunition to launch online attacks. The targets reportedly included four supreme court ministers and powerful politicians including the former president of Brazil's lower house, Arthur Lira, and the then governor of São Paulo, João Doria, a prominent rightwing rival to the president. Journalists and public servants were also reportedly spied on, including Hugo Loss, a respected member of the environmental agency, Ibama, who was on the front line of efforts to protect the Amazon at a time when illegal loggers and miners were emboldened by Bolsonaro's anti-environment rhetoric and climate denial. Loss had worked closely with Bruno Pereira, the Indigenous expert and former government employee who was murdered in the rainforest region three years ago this month with the British journalist Dom Phillips. The newspaper O Globo said police believed the Bolsonarista spy network was created in order 'to make it possible for Bolsonaro to remain in the presidential chair'. Bolsonaro and Ramagem made no immediate comment on the accusations but have previously denied such charges. Carlos Bolsonaro responded to the allegations on X, suggesting that they were the result of a political grudge against his father's political movement. 'Was anyone in any doubt that Lula's PF [federal police] would do this to me?' he tweeted.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Relieved Pakistanis recall 'horrifying nights' as Israel, Iran trade strikes
Mohammad Hassan anxiously returned to Pakistan from neighbouring Iran this week after witnessing drones, missiles, and explosions tear through Tehran's sky during what he called long, "horrifying nights". The 35-year-old University of Tehran student is one of about 3,000 Pakistanis who, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, have returned home since Israel launched its aerial war against its long-time enemy last week. Governments around the world are scrambling to evacuate their nationals caught up in the rapidly spiralling conflict as Israel and Iran trade missile and drone strikes. "I was in the city centre where most of the strikes took place and even one of the student dormitories was attacked and luckily no one was dead, but students were injured," Hassan said. There are more than 500 Pakistani students at his university alone, he said, all of them on their way "back home". "Those days and nights were very horrifying... hearing sirens, the wailing, the danger of being hit by missiles. As one peeped out the window in the night, you could see drones, missiles with fire tails," he told AFP. - Ghost town - Pakistan and Iran have a shaky diplomatic relationship. They bombed each other's territory little more than a year ago, both claiming to target rebels using their neighbour's land to launch attacks. Yet they have never suspended trade, tourism and academic ties. Iranian consulates across Pakistan have stepped up efforts to promote their universities. Between 25 million and 35 million Pakistani Shiite Muslims also hope to make at least one pilgrimage in their lifetime to holy sites in Iran, foremost among them the sacred city of Qom. Mohammad Khalil, a 41-year-old petroleum engineer, left Tehran three days ago, the capital of the Islamic Republic looking like a ghost town as residents sheltered indoors and families fled. "In the last two days, I saw people moving out of the city in different vehicles with necessary commodities," Khalil said. Abdul Ghani Khan sells medical equipment in his hometown of Peshawar in northwest Pakistan and travels to Iran regularly for supplies. He had been in Tehran for a week when the first Israeli missiles fell on Friday. Iran and Israel have traded heavy missile fire in the days since, raising fears of a wider regional conflict. Pakistan is in a difficult position as the only Muslim-majority country with nuclear weapons. It, like Iran, does not recognise Israel but is also a major ally of the United States. Khan had to make the journey home by road because the airspace is now closed. Pakistan has also shut its border crossings with Iran to all except Pakistanis wanting to return home. "We saw drones, red lights of anti-aircraft guns and I spotted one building catch fire," Khan said. - 'Offering prayer' - Mohammad Asif, a lawyer from Lahore in Pakistan's east, heard about the air strikes while on a pilgrimage in Qom. He wasn't initially afraid and continued his pilgrimage to Mashhad in Iran's northeast, home to the golden-domed Imam Reza shrine. That was until Israeli strikes hit the airport in Mashhad, nearly 1,000 kilometres (620 miles) from the Pakistani border. Samreen Ali was also in Mashhad but, like Asif, cut her trip short and returned with her husband and 15-year-old son. She was praying in a mosque in Mashhad when Israel struck the city. Ali said she had visited Iran nine times before on pilgrimages and never imagined witnessing war there. "I was offering prayer when I heard two explosions," she told AFP. She then noticed she wasn't receiving messages on her phone and assumed that "communication was being restricted... because of the war". Syed Saqib, 46, was in Qom and had to travel 500 kilometres (310 miles) by bus southeast to Yazd. "We had to take alternative routes, spend an entire night waiting at a bus terminal," Saqib said. They then boarded buses to Zahedan, a city near the border with Pakistan's Balochistan province. A relieved Saqib recalled making the border crossing at Taftan, surrounded by families carrying heavy luggage. mak-sam/stm/pbt
