A jury in the United States has ordered Greenpeace to pay more than $660 million in damages in a defamation lawsuit brought by oil pipeline operator Energy Transfer. The environmental advocacy group has vowed to appeal Wednesday’s verdict, which comes nearly a decade after activists joined a protest led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe against the Dakota Access Pipeline, one of the largest anti-fossil fuel demonstrations in U.S. history. The jury in North Dakota found Greenpeace liable on charges including trespass, nuisance, conspiracy, and deprivation of property access.
Energy Transfer, a Texas-based company valued at $64 billion, welcomed the decision and denied that the lawsuit was an attempt to suppress speech. In a statement, the company thanked the judge and jury for their time and effort, adding that while they were pleased Greenpeace would be held accountable, the real victory was for the people of Mandan and North Dakota, who, according to them, had endured harassment and disruptions from Greenpeace-backed protesters. The nine-person jury in Mandan deliberated for two days after a trial that began in late February before ruling in favor of Energy Transfer on most counts.
A group of lawyers monitoring the case, known as the Trial Monitoring Committee, pointed out that many jurors had ties to the fossil fuel industry. In a statement following jury selection, they noted that some jurors openly admitted they could not be impartial, yet the judge allowed them to remain on the panel. Greenpeace plans to appeal the decision and is also countersuing Energy Transfer in the Netherlands, arguing that the company is using nuisance lawsuits to suppress dissent.
A hearing for that case is set for July 2. Greenpeace International General Counsel Kristin Casper reaffirmed the organization’s commitment to its cause, stating that the fight against Big Oil was not over and that the law and truth were on their side.
The case dates back to the 2016 protests in North Dakota, when the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe established a protest camp along the proposed Dakota Access Pipeline route to halt construction. Calling themselves “water protectors,” they remained at the site for over a year, initially drawing support from other Indigenous communities and later from environmental organizations like Greenpeace, as well as hundreds of U.S. Army veterans.
Despite facing harsh winter conditions and violent arrests by police, the demonstrators persisted in their opposition to the pipeline. Energy Transfer’s lead lawyer, Trey Cox, argued in closing statements that Greenpeace had exploited the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe to advance its anti-fossil fuel agenda. However, Greenpeace maintains that its role in the movement was small and peaceful, emphasizing that Native Americans led the protests. Lakota organizer Nick Tilsen testified that the claim that Greenpeace orchestrated the protests was paternalistic.
Despite widespread resistance, the pipeline, designed to transport fracked crude oil to refineries and global markets, became operational in 2017. Energy Transfer, however, continued its legal battle against Greenpeace, initially seeking $300 million in damages through a federal lawsuit, which was dismissed. The company then shifted its strategy to North Dakota’s state courts, where laws do not protect against Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP), a tactic often used to silence critics through expensive legal battles.
The verdict marks another win for the fossil fuel industry at a time when former President Donald Trump has promised to expand oil and gas production under the slogan “drill, baby, drill,” including by rolling back environmental protections.
Throughout the years-long legal fight, Energy Transfer’s billionaire CEO Kelcy Warren, a major Trump donor, has been open about his motivations. He stated that his primary objective in suing Greenpeace was not just financial compensation but also to send a message, going so far as to say that activists should be removed from the gene pool. Critics argue that the case is a textbook example of a SLAPP lawsuit designed to drain financial resources and silence opposition.
The verdict comes amid a broader crackdown on dissent in the U.S., with the Trump administration seeking to curb protest rights across various movements. Author and journalist Naomi Klein reacted to the ruling by warning that attacks on climate activists, labor organizers, and human rights advocates are interconnected. She argued that while fossil fuel companies should be held financially accountable for the damage caused by climate change, they are instead using the courts to punish those who challenge them.
Meanwhile, the effects of climate change continue to worsen, contributing to increasingly severe disasters in the U.S. and around the world, including wildfires in California and a rare inland hurricane in North Carolina. Meanwhile, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe continues its legal battle against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, asserting that the pipeline is operating illegally and must be shut down.