US News

Jury finds Greenpeace must pay hundreds of millions in case over North Dakota pipeline protests

Today's Video Headlines
0 seconds of 54 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:54
00:54
 

A North Dakota jury on Wednesday found Greenpeace liable for defamation and other claims brought by a pipeline company in connection with protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The nine-person jury awarded Dallas-based Energy Transfer and its subsidiary Dakota Access hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

The lawsuit had accused Netherlands-based Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA and funding arm Greenpeace Fund Inc. of defamation, trespass, nuisance, civil conspiracy and other acts.

Dakota Access pipeline protesters defy law enforcement officers who are trying to force them from a camp on private land in the path of pipeline construction, Oct. 27, 2016, near Cannon Ball, N.D.
A North Dakota jury on Wednesday found Greenpeace liable for defamation and other claims brought by Dallas-based Energy Transfer and its subsidiary Dakota Access. AP

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.

Protesters against the Dakota Access oil pipeline congregate, Nov. 21, 2016, on a long-closed bridge on a state highway near Cannon Ball., N.D. near their camp in southern North Dakota.
The nine-person jury awarded the companies millions of dollars in damages. AP

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.

Greenpeace representatives have said the lawsuit is a critical test of First Amendment free speech and protest rights and could threaten the organization’s future.

A spokesperson for Energy Transfer previously said the lawsuit is about Greenpeace not following the law, not free speech.