logo
A court ordered Greenpeace to pay a pipeline company $660M. What happens next?

A court ordered Greenpeace to pay a pipeline company $660M. What happens next?

Yahoo21-03-2025

A jury in North Dakota ordered Greenpeace to pay more than $660 million in damages to Energy Transfer, the company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline. Energy Transfer sued Greenpeace in 2019, alleging that it had orchestrated a vast conspiracy against the company by organizing historic protests on the Standing Rock Sioux reservation in 2016 and 2017.
In its lawsuit, Energy Transfer Partners accused three Greenpeace entities — two in the U.S. and one based in Amsterdam — of violating North Dakota trespassing and defamation laws, and of coordinating protests aimed to stop the 1,172-mile pipeline from transporting oil from North Dakota's Bakken oil fields to a terminal in Illinois. Greenpeace maintained it played only a minor supporting role in the Indigenous-led movement.
'This was obviously a test case meant to scare others from exercising their First Amendment rights to free speech and peaceful protest,' said Deepa Padmanabha, a senior legal adviser for Greenpeace USA. 'They're trying to buy silence; that silence is not for sale.'
Legal and Indigenous experts said the lawsuit was a'textbook' example of a 'strategic lawsuit against public participation,' known colloquially as a SLAPP suit, a tactic used by corporations and wealthy individuals to drown their critics in legal fees. They also criticized Energy Transfer for using the lawsuit to undermine tribes' treaty rights by exaggerating the role of out-of-state agitators.
The three Greenpeace entities named in the lawsuit — Greenpeace Inc., a U.S.-based advocacy arm; Greenpeace Funds, which raises money and is also based in the U.S.; and Greenpeace International, based in the Netherlands — are now planning their next moves, including an appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court and a separate countersuit in the European Union.
As part of a previous appeal to move the trial more impartial court, Greenpeace submitted a 33-page document to the state Supreme Court explaining that the jurors in Morton County, North Dakota — where the trial occurred — would likely be biased against the defendants, since they were drawn from the same area where the anti-pipeline protests had taken place and disrupted daily life.
The request included results from a 2022 survey of 150 potential jurors in Morton County conducted by the National Jury Project, a litigation consulting company, which found 97 percent of residents said they could not be a fair or impartial juror in the lawsuit. Greenpeace also pointed out that nine of the 20 final jurors had either 'direct personal experience' with the protests, or a friend or family member with direct personal experience.
Pat Parenteau, an emeritus professor at the Vermont Law and Graduate School, said the chances that the North Dakota Supreme Court will overturn the lower court's verdict are 'probably less than 50 percent.' What may be more likely, he said, is that the Supreme Court will reduce the 'outrageous' amount of money charged by the Morton County jury, which includes various penalties that doubled the $300 million in damages that Energy Transfer had originally claimed.
'The court does have a lot of discretion in reducing the amount of damages,' he said. He called the Morton County verdict 'beyond punitive. This is scorched Earth, what we're seeing here.'
Depending on what happens at the North Dakota Supreme Court, Parenteau also said there's a basis for appealing the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, based on the First Amendment free speech issues involved. But, he added, the move could be 'a really dangerous proposition,' with the court's conservative supermajority and the precedent such a case could set. A federal decision in favor of Energy Transfer could limit any organizations' ability to protest nationwide — and not just against pipelines.
Amsterdam-based Greenpeace International, which coordinates 24 independent Greenpeace chapters around the world but is legally separate from them, is also fighting back. It countersued Energy Partners in the Netherlands in February, making use of a new anti-SLAPP directive in the EU that went into effect in May 2024.
Greenpeace International is only on the hook for a tiny fraction of the more than $600 million charged against the three Greenpeace bodies by the Morton County jury. Its countersuit in the EU wouldn't change what has happened in U.S. courts. Instead, it seeks to recover costs incurred by the Amsterdam-based branch during its years-long fights against the Morton County lawsuit and an earlier, federal case in 2017 that was eventually dismissed.
Greenpeace International's trial will begin in Dutch courts in July and is the first test of the EU's anti-SLAPP directive. According to Kristen Casper, general counsel for Greenpeace International, the branch in the EU has a strong case because the only action it took in support of the anti-pipeline protests was to sign an open letter — what she described as a clear case of protected public participation. Eric Heinze, a free speech expert and professor of law and humanities at Queen Mary University of London, said the case appeared 'black and white.'
'Normally I don't like to predict,' he said, 'but if I had to put money on this I would bet for Greenpeace to win.'
While Greenpeace's various entities may have to pay damages as ordered by U.S. courts, the result of the case in the EU, Casper said a victory would send an international message against 'corporate bullying and weaponization of the law.' Padmanabha said that regardless of the damages that the Greenpeace USA incurs, the organization isn't going away any time soon. 'You can't bankrupt the movement,' she said. 'What we work on, our campaigns and our commitments — that is not going to change.'
In response to request for comment, Energy Transfer said the Morton County jury's decision was a victory for the people of Mandan and 'for all law-abiding Americans who understand the difference between the right to free speech and breaking the law. That Greenpeace has been held responsible is a win for all of us.'
Nick Estes, an assistant professor of American Indian studies at the University of Minnesota and member of the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe who wrote a book about the Dakota Access Pipeline protests, said the case was about more than just punishing Greenpeace — it was a proxy attack on the water protectors at Standing Rock and the broader environmental justice movement. He said it showed what could happen 'if you step outside the path of what they consider as an acceptable form of protest.''They had to sidestep the actual context of the entire movement, around treaty rights, land rights, water rights, and tribal sovereignty because they couldn't win that fight,' he said. 'They had to go a circuitous route, and find a sympathetic court to attack the environmental movement.'
Janet Alkire, the chair of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, said in a March 3 statement that the Morton County case was 'frivolously alleging defamation and seeking money damages, designed to shut down all voices supporting Standing Rock.' She said the company also used propaganda to discredit the tribe during and after the protests.'Part of the attack on our tribe is to attack our allies,' Alkire wrote. 'The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe will not be silenced.'This story has been updated.
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A court ordered Greenpeace to pay a pipeline company $660M. What happens next? on Mar 21, 2025.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Bessent says report he called Musk ‘a fraud' is ‘fake news'
Bessent says report he called Musk ‘a fraud' is ‘fake news'

The Hill

time40 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Bessent says report he called Musk ‘a fraud' is ‘fake news'

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent addressed his reported clashes with Elon Musk during a congressional hearing on Wednesday, rejecting claims that he called Musk a 'fraud' as 'fake news.' After Musk's explosive fallout with President Trump last week, longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon told The Washington Post that the tech billionaire and Bessent had a physical altercation, which the White House denied, and that Bessent called Musk 'a total fraud' in a heated exchange about the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)'s efforts to cut government spending. Bannon helmed the conservative outlet Breitbart News for several years until his ouster from the site in 2018, following a brief stint in Trump's first administration. 'I know Elon Musk body checked you at the White House,' Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) said to Bessent during Ways & Means hearing on the Treasury Department. 'You know that?' Bessent shot back. 'You believe what you read on Breitbart, that's what you are telling this Congress.' Coincidentally, Bessent recently quoted a Breitbart article on the social platform X in response to mass protests in Los Angeles against Trump's immigration crackdown. Gomez continued in the hearing, 'If it's too sensitive for you, I won't ask that question,' prompting a retort from the South Carolina native with an apparent strike at South African-born Musk. 'I'll take South Carolina over South Africa any day,' Bessent said. Trump confirmed that Musk and Bessent had 'a little bit of a shouting match' but denied it turned violent. 'They did have an argument, but I didn't see a lot of physicality there,' the president told reporters at the White House on Monday.

Israeli forces recover bodies of two hostages in Gaza, PM says
Israeli forces recover bodies of two hostages in Gaza, PM says

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Israeli forces recover bodies of two hostages in Gaza, PM says

Israeli security forces operating in Gaza have recovered the bodies of two Israeli hostages, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says. He named one of them as Yair (Yaya) Yaakov, 59, who was killed inside his home at Kibbutz Nir Oz during the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023. His teenage sons, Or and Yagil, and his partner, Meirav Tal, were abducted alive and released in November 2023, as part of a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas. Netanyahu said the name of the other hostage had not yet been released, but that their family had been informed. There are now 53 hostages still being held by Hamas in Gaza, at least 20 of whom are believed to be alive. News of the recovery of Yair Yaakov's body initially came from his sons. "Dad, I love you," Yagil wrote in a post on Instagram on Wednesday evening, according to the Haaretz newspaper. "I don't know how to respond yet. I'm sad to say this. I'm waiting for your funeral, I love you and knew this day would come." Yagil also thanked the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the Shin Bet internal security service and expressed hope that the remaining hostages "will be brought [back] in a deal that doesn't risk soldiers". Later, Netanyahu issued a statement saying: "Together with all the citizens of Israel, my wife and I extend our deepest condolences to the families who have lost their most beloved." "I thank the soldiers and commanders for another successful execution of the sacred mission to return our hostages." The Hostages and Missing Families Forum, which represents many hostages' families, said in a statement that it "bows its head in sorrow over the murder of Yaya and shares in the profound grief of the Yaakov family". "There are no words to express the depth of this pain," it added. "The hostages have no time. We must bring them all home, Now!" The Israeli military launched a campaign in Gaza in response to the 7 October attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage. At least 55,104 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry.

Anti-Trump protests planned June 14. Here's what Ohio protesters can, can't do under the law
Anti-Trump protests planned June 14. Here's what Ohio protesters can, can't do under the law

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Anti-Trump protests planned June 14. Here's what Ohio protesters can, can't do under the law

Ongoing demonstrations in Los Angeles and some areas of Ohio continue this week in response to recent ICE raids as the Trump administration ramps up its detention and deportation of immigrants. More large-scale protests are expected in Ohio and nationwide on June 14. Trump has since deployed the National Guard and Marines in LA, calling the protests 'violent, insurrectionist mobs' and 'lawless riots' on Truth Social. Local law enforcement has also issued a curfew for the area. Peaceful protest and assembly are protected under the First Amendment, but local or statewide restrictions may still apply. Here's what Ohio protest attendees should know ahead of the June 14 rallies, including how some Ohio protest laws changed in 2022 in the wake of George Floyd's 202 death. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, assembly, and petition. Typically, demonstrations can happen in public places like streets, sidewalks, and parks. However, your freedom of expression could have limitations if it incites riots or violence. While not an exhaustive list, here are a few rules Ohio protestors must follow, according to the ACLU of Ohio and the Legal Aid Society of Cleveland. You can't protest on private property without permission from the owner. You cannot stop others from using the public space, such as blocking traffic or pedestrian walkways. No fighting, rioting, or 'disorderly conduct' under Ohio law. Law enforcement can implement "time, place, and manner' restrictions like enforcing noise levels or permits. You may need a permit for events that block traffic or close down streets, or if you use amplifiers, such as bullhorns. Demonstrators are allowed to wear a mask as part of their protest, but they may be required to provide information if suspected of a crime. It is a federal crime to threaten to harm the president, the vice president, or a major candidate. Do not physically or verbally antagonize the police or law enforcement. Avoid carrying any drugs or weapons to protests. If arrested, you could face additional charges for possession. Refusing to provide information or providing false information when stopped is illegal. If you are arrested, the ACLU of Ohio provides additional guidance on what to do, such as not resisting arrest and your right to hire an attorney. More protests are planned across the country on Saturday, June 14, 2025, the same day as President Trump's military parade and birthday celebration. According to USA TODAY reporting, the upcoming "No Kings Day" rallies are expected to be the largest and most widespread protests since Trump took office in January. In response, Trump said he planned to address any protests, including against his June 14 military parade, with "force." In the wake of the nationwide ICE protests, Vice President JD Vance defended Trump, stating on X that the administration "will not be intimidated by lawlessness" and that "Trump will not back down" as ICE enforces immigration laws. This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Protesters plan more anti-Trump rallies. What Ohioans can, can't do

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store