Particle.news
Download on the App Store
20 ARTICLES
·
last mo.

Greenpeace Ordered to Pay $650 Million in Pipeline Defamation Case

A North Dakota jury found Greenpeace liable for defamation and other claims against Energy Transfer, raising concerns over free speech and the future of activism.

FILE - Protestors demonstrating against the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline wade in cold creek waters confronting local police, near Cannon Ball, N.D., Nov. 2, 2016. (AP Photo/John L. Mone, File)
Greenpeace representatives talk with reporters on Wednesday, March 19, 2025, outside the Morton County Courthouse in Mandan, N.D. From left are Greenpeace USA Interim Executive Director Sushma Raman, Greenpeace USA Senior Legal Adviser Deepa Padmanabha, Greenpeace International General Counsel Kristin Casper, Greenpeace USA attorney Everett Jack Jr., Greenpeace Fund Inc. attorney Matt Kelly and Greenpeace USA Associate General Counsel Jay Meisel. (AP Photo/Jack Dura)
FILE - Members of Greenpeace press conference next to a giant art installation called 'Perpetual Plastic Machine' ahead of Global Plastic Treaty talks Saturday, May 27, 2023 in Paris. (AP Photo/Aurelien Morissard,File)
FILE - Activists of the environment organization Greenpeace protest against the climate policy of the German government in front of the chancellery, prior to the cabinet meeting in Berlin, Germany, Wednesday, June 21, 2023. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber,File)

Overview

  • The jury awarded over $650 million in damages to Energy Transfer, marking a significant financial blow to Greenpeace.
  • The lawsuit accused Greenpeace of defamation, trespass, nuisance, and conspiracy related to the Dakota Access Pipeline protests in 2016 and 2017.
  • Greenpeace plans to appeal the decision, citing threats to First Amendment rights and the potential chilling effect on activism.
  • Critics have labeled the lawsuit a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), designed to silence dissent and burden defendants financially.
  • Concerns were raised about the fairness of the trial, including jury ties to the fossil fuel industry and the local court's rejection of venue change requests.