In a significant legal decision, an environmental organization, Greenpeace, has been ordered to pay over $660 million in damages following a lawsuit by a pipeline company related to protests against the construction of the Dakota Access oil pipeline in North Dakota. This ruling was delivered by a jury on Wednesday.
The suit was brought by Dallas-based Energy Transfer and its subsidiary, Dakota Access, who accused Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, and Greenpeace Fund Inc. of various charges, including defamation, trespass, and civil conspiracy. While Greenpeace USA was held responsible for all charges, the other entities were liable for some. The financial penalties will be distributed among the three groups in varying amounts.
Greenpeace had warned that a substantial monetary judgment could potentially bankrupt the organization. After the nine-person jury reached its decision, Greenpeace’s senior legal adviser reaffirmed the group’s commitment to its mission, saying their work “is never going to stop.” She indicated that the organization would regroup to consider their future actions.
Following the verdict, Greenpeace expressed its intention to appeal. Kristin Casper, General Counsel for Greenpeace International, reaffirmed their stance that “the fight against Big Oil is not over,” confident that both legality and truth support their cause. The group anticipates further legal encounters with Energy Transfer in an anti-intimidation lawsuit scheduled for July in Amsterdam.
The total damages sum to nearly $666.9 million, with Greenpeace USA responsible for the largest portion, approximately $404 million. The remaining amount will be divided between Greenpeace Fund Inc. and Greenpeace International.
Energy Transfer viewed the jury’s decision as a victory, not only for them but also for Americans who value lawful exercise of free speech. The company remarked on the outcome as a demonstration that while free speech is important, it does not extend to unlawful activity.
In a statement, an Energy Transfer attorney emphasized that this verdict serves as a reminder that abuse of the right to protest in illegal ways can lead to accountability.
The legal battle stems from significant protests in 2016 and 2017 against the Dakota Access Pipeline, particularly its crossing of the Missouri River upstream from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. The tribe has long argued that the pipeline endangers their water supply.
The Dakota Access Pipeline, which began operations in mid-2017, currently moves around 5% of the United States’ daily oil output. During the trial, Energy Transfer’s lawyer accused Greenpeace of orchestrating a campaign to halt the pipeline’s progress, alleging that they funded external protestors, provided protest supplies, and aimed to obstruct the project with misinformation.
In contrast, Greenpeace’s defense argued that there was insufficient evidence tying the organization to the alleged claims, asserting that their employees had minimal involvement in the protests and that the delays attributed to Energy Transfer’s operations were unrelated to Greenpeace’s actions.