🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.
Greenpeace said its activism will never stop despite a North Dakota jury ordering the organization to pay more than $660 million in damages for defamation and other claims related to protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline.
The verdict, delivered Wednesday, could push Greenpeace toward financial ruin, the group has acknowledged. Yet, leaders insist the ruling will not deter their environmental campaigns, including against fossil fuel infrastructure projects in North Dakota and beyond.
Deepa Padmanabha, senior legal counsel for Greenpeace, told reporters outside the courthouse that the organization's work "is never going to stop."
"That's the really important message today," Padmanabha said. "We're just walking out, and we're going to get together and figure out what our next steps are."
Why It Matters
The decision is one of the largest financial judgments ever leveled against an environmental nonprofit and could severely limit Greenpeace's operations.
It raises questions about First Amendment rights in the U.S. and may have a chilling effect on activism more broadly, though Greenpeace's critics argue there is a clear distinction between free speech and unlawful activity.
What to Know
The lawsuit, brought by Dallas-based Energy Transfer and subsidiary Dakota Access, accused Greenpeace of defamation, trespass, civil conspiracy and other acts in connection to its role in the 2016 and 2017 protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline.
Greenpeace USA was found liable on all counts, while Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund Inc. were found liable on some.
The damages include nearly $404 million owed by Greenpeace USA and about $131 million each from Greenpeace Fund Inc. and Greenpeace International.
Energy Transfer called the ruling a victory for "Americans who understand the difference between the right to free speech and breaking the law."
"This win is really for the people of Mandan and throughout North Dakota who had to live through the daily harassment and disruptions caused by the protesters who were funded and trained by Greenpeace," the company said in a statement to the Associated Press.
The case stems from protests over the Dakota Access Pipeline, a multi-state project that transports about 5 percent of the United States' daily oil production.
Opponents, including the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, argue the pipeline threatens their water supply. The protests, which gained global attention, resulted in mass arrests and law enforcement confrontations.
Energy Transfer's legal team argued that Greenpeace orchestrated a campaign to obstruct the project, including providing financial support for demonstrators, supplying blockade materials and spreading misinformation about the pipeline's environmental risks.
Attorneys for Greenpeace denied the allegations, saying there was no evidence linking the group to Energy Transfer's financial losses or construction delays.
What People Are Saying
A loss for Greenpeace could "establish that anybody who assists in putting on a protest is going to be held responsible for what everybody else does at that protest," James Wheaton, the founder and senior counsel for the First Amendment Project, a public interest law firm, told CNN on Tuesday.
Greenpeace has vowed to fight the decision, saying it will appeal the ruling and continue its activism.
"The fight against Big Oil is not over today," said Kristin Casper, Greenpeace International's general counsel. "We know that the law and the truth are on our side."
She added that Greenpeace has already taken legal action against Energy Transfer in Amsterdam, filing an anti-intimidation lawsuit last month.
Energy Transfer attorney Trey Cox defended the jury's decision, arguing it sends a strong message to activist groups that go beyond peaceful protest.
"This verdict clearly conveys that when this right to peacefully protest is abused in a lawless and exploitative manner, such actions will be held accountable," Cox said in a statement.
What's Next
Greenpeace's appeal process could take years, during which time the organization may have to restructure or scale back operations to manage its legal costs.
The ruling could embolden other corporations to take similar legal action against activist groups, raising concerns over a potential chilling effect on environmental and social justice movements.
Meanwhile, Greenpeace has vowed to press forward with its campaigns against fossil fuel projects, including efforts in North Dakota and other energy infrastructure hotspots.
This article uses reporting by the Associated Press.
fairness meter
About the writer
Shane Croucher is a Breaking News Editor based in London, UK. He has previously overseen the My Turn, Fact Check ... Read more