Greenpeace socked with $660 million in damages for Dakota Access Pipeline protests

Photo: Fibonacci Blue via Flickr. Licensed under CC BY 2.0.

It would be difficult to overstate the likely impact of the jury’s decision in the defamation case brought by the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline against environmental icon Greenpeace over its role in protesting the project eight years ago. The damages awarded by the Morton County jury in Mandan after two days of deliberations stunned those in the courtroom and members of the media like the New York Times.

A North Dakota jury on Wednesday awarded damages totaling more than $660 million to the Texas-based pipeline company Energy Transfer, which had sued Greenpeace over its role in protests nearly a decade ago against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The verdict was a major blow to the environmental organization. Greenpeace had said that Energy Transfer’s claimed damages, in the range of $300 million, would be enough to put the group out of business in the United States. The jury on Wednesday awarded far more than that.

Greenpeace representatives were clearly taken aback by the more than half a billion dollars in damages. The environmental group unsuccessfully tried to make the case about the influence of powerful corporate interests.

“This case should alarm everyone, no matter their political inclinations,” said Sushma Raman, Interim Executive Director Greenpeace Inc, Greenpeace Fund. “It’s part of a renewed push by corporations to weaponize our courts to silence dissent. We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech.”

The complex lawsuit was heard over the course of three weeks with dozens of witnesses called years after law enforcement cleared out the last of hundreds of activists and an estimated 21 million pounds of garbage and human waste from their makeshift camp.

The case reaches back to protests in 2016 and 2017 against the Dakota Access oil pipeline and its Missouri River crossing upstream of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. For years the tribe has opposed the line as a risk to its water supply. The multistate pipeline has been transporting oil since mid-2017.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Trey Cox has said Greenpeace carried out a scheme to stop the pipeline’s construction. During opening statements, he alleged Greenpeace paid outsiders to come into the area and protest, sent blockade supplies, organized or led protester trainings, and made untrue statements about the project to stop it.

Attorneys for the Greenpeace entities said there is no evidence to the claims, that Greenpeace employees had little or no involvement in the protests and the organizations had nothing to do with Energy Transfer’s delays in construction or refinancing.

The financial implications for Greenpeace operations in the U.S. could be wide-ranging. The group plans to appeal the verdict to the North Dakota Supreme Court in a case that could be a turning point in defining how far environmental activists can go in challenging energy and other development.

Energy Transfer called the verdict a “win” for residents of Mandan, North Dakota, and across the state.

“While we are pleased that Greenpeace has been held accountable for their actions against us, 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.