A jury says the environmental group defamed Energy Transfer during Dakota Access pipeline protests.
A North Dakota jury has ruled that Greenpeace must pay more than $660 million in damages to Dallas-based oil and gas company Energy Transfer, finding the environmental group liable for defamation and other claims related to protests against the Dakota Access pipeline.
The nine-person jury delivered its verdict on March 19 in a lawsuit brought by Energy Transfer Partners, which sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages from Greenpeace. The case stemmed from the environmental group’s 2016–2017 protests against the pipeline’s Missouri River crossing, located upstream of a tribal reservation. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe has long opposed the project, citing risks to its water supply and sacred burial grounds.
The lawsuit cited Greenpeace’s claims that Energy Transfer desecrated burial grounds and culturally significant sites during construction, as well as assertions that the pipeline would “catastrophically alter the climate.” Cox countered that the company had made 140 route adjustments to protect sacred sites and said Energy Transfer was committed to being “a good corporate citizen in North Dakota.”
Energy Transfer accused Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, and other parties of defamation, trespass, nuisance, and civil conspiracy. During the trial, which began in late February, the company’s attorney, Trey Cox, argued that Greenpeace funded and organized protesters, provided blockade supplies, conducted training sessions, and spread misinformation to block the pipeline’s construction.
Greenpeace attorneys rejected the allegations, stating there was no evidence linking the organization to the disruptions caused by the protesters. They argued the lawsuit was an attempt to silence activism through financial and legal intimidation.
“Beyond the impact that this lawsuit could have on the Greenpeace entities, one of the most worrisome things about the case is that it could establish dangerous new legal precedents that could hold any participant at protests responsible for the actions of others at those protests,” Deepa Padmanabha, Greenpeace USA senior legal advisor, said in a Feb. 24 statement. “And you can imagine that this would have a serious chilling effect on anybody who wants to engage in protest.”
By Tom Ozimek
