Jury finds Greenpeace at fault for protest damages, awards pipeline developer more than $660 million

Yahoo

19-03-2025

Kristin Casper, center, general counsel for Greenpeace International, and other representatives for Greenpeace speak to the media March 19, 2025, outside the Morton County Courthouse in North Dakota. (Amy Dalrymple/North Dakota Monitor)
MANDAN, N.D. — A Morton County jury on Wednesday ordered Greenpeace to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline, finding that the environmental group incited illegal behavior by anti-pipeline protesters and defamed the company.
The nine-person jury delivered a verdict in favor of Energy Transfer on most counts, awarding more than $660 million in damages to Energy Transfer and Dakota Access LLC.
The case centers on Greenpeace's involvement in protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline in 2016 and 2017. The demonstrations were started by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, which views the project as a pollution threat and imposition onto Native land. Thousands of protesters camped for months north of the Standing Rock Reservation, near where the pipeline crosses underneath the Missouri River in Morton County.
Energy Transfer filed the colossal lawsuit in 2019, accusing Greenpeace of providing resources, including supplies, intel and training, to encourage Dakota Access Pipeline protesters to commit criminal acts to stop construction of the project. The company also claims that Greenpeace intentionally spread misinformation about the pipeline to tarnish its reputation with banks.
'These are the facts, not the fake news of the Greenpeace propaganda machine,' Trey Cox, the lead attorney representing Energy Transfer, said in a press conference outside the Morton County Courthouse after the verdict.
Energy Transfer representatives believe protesting is an 'inherent American right' but that Greenpeace's actions were 'unacceptable,' Cox continued.
The company sued three Greenpeace entities — Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund. The jury found Greenpeace USA liable for almost all claims. The jury did not find Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund responsible for the alleged on-the-ground harms committed by protesters, but did find those entities liable for defamation, conspiracy and interfering with Energy Transfer's business.
Attorneys representing Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund told the jury that they never had any employees visit the demonstration camps or provide money to support the protests.
Both the plaintiffs and the defense have called the case one of the largest and most complex civil suits in state history.
Greenpeace USA, which the jury ordered to pay more than $400 million of the damages, has previously said the lawsuit threatened to bankrupt the organization. When asked whether that was still the case Wednesday afternoon, Greenpeace Senior Legal Adviser Deepa Padmanabha said 'the work of Greenpeace is never gonna stop.'
Greenpeace didn't say immediately whether the organization would appeal the decision.
'We have not had a chance to even circle up as a group yet, but the fight is not over,' Padmanabha said.
During closing arguments on Monday, Cox told jurors that Greenpeace's actions caused between $265 million and $340 million in damages to the company. He asked the jury to award Energy Transfer that amount plus additional punitive damages.
The verdict brought to a close a more than three-week trial in Mandan. The jury began deliberating Monday afternoon after hearing testimony from dozens of witnesses, including current and former Greenpeace employees, Indigenous activists, Energy Transfer representatives and law enforcement.
Among the witnesses was former Greenpeace executive director Annie Leonard and Energy Transfer Executive Chairman Kelcy Warren, who appeared by video deposition.
Greenpeace denies the allegations and says the lawsuit is a ploy to punish activist groups.
Some observers of the trial who participated in the anti-pipeline demonstration expressed anger after the verdict was announced Wednesday.
'Standing Rock was not heard,' Waniya Locke, a Standing Rock citizen who attended much of the trial, said. She said that she will continue opposing the pipeline.
Kandi White, a member of the Mandan Hidatsa and Arikara Nation who also observed the trial, said she is 'ashamed' of the decision. She said she found the implication that Greenpeace orchestrated the Dakota Access Pipeline protests insulting to Standing Rock and the other Native nations that were at the center of the movement.
'An appeal should be easy for any court,' White said.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Greenpeace maintains that the protests were Indigenous-led and that it only provided support to demonstrators because it was asked.
Some witnesses, Native organizers and law enforcement who attended the protests also testified that Greenpeace was not seen as a leader at the camps.
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Chair Janet Alkire in a statement earlier this month called the lawsuit 'frivolous.' Alkire did not testify in the case.
Free speech and environmental advocates have also spoken out against the trial, arguing that the suit should have been dismissed outright and that the Morton County jury would not be able to render a fair verdict.
'It is our collective assessment that the jury verdict against Greenpeace in North Dakota reflects a deeply flawed trial with multiple due process violations that denied Greenpeace the ability to present anything close to a full defense,' a group of attorneys that monitored the proceedings said in a joint statement Wednesday afternoon.
Greenpeace more than once petitioned to move the case to a different North Dakota court, but was denied.
U.S. Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., applauded the verdict Wednesday.
'Today, justice has been done with Greenpeace and its radical environmentalist buddies who encouraged this destructive behavior during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests with their defamatory and false claims about the pipeline,' Cramer said in a statement. 'They can think twice now about doing it again.'
Greenpeace recently filed suit against Energy Transfer in the Netherlands, asking a court to find that the company's legal challenge in Morton County violated the environmental group's rights and to award it damages.
That case is believed to be the first lawsuit filed under a new European Union directive intended to shield organizations against free speech attacks.
Other major lawsuits involving the Dakota Access Pipeline protests are ongoing.
North Dakota in 2019 sued the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for $38 million, alleging that the federal agency mishandled its response to the demonstrations. The Army Crops has jurisdiction over the portion of the pipeline that passes underneath Lake Oahe, and owns the land that became site of the largest protest camp during the demonstrations. A judge has yet to rule on the case.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in October filed a separate case against the Army Corps for allowing the pipeline to continue operating without an easement. The tribe is asking a federal judge to shut the pipeline down.
This story was last updated at 5:10 p.m. Central time.
This story was originally published by the North Dakota Monitor. Like South Dakota Searchlight, it's part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. North Dakota Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Amy Dalrymple for questions: [e-mail].