(The Center Square) – A North Dakota jury of nine on Wednesday found environmental activist group Greenpeace liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages in a years-long lawsuit brought by Energy Transfer, the company that built the Dakota Access Pipeline that became the subject of sometimes violent protests and international attention.
Energy Transfer sued Greenpeace for $300 million over the protests that delayed the pipeline’s completion by five months, but jurors awarded the energy infrastructure giant and its subsidiary, Dakota Access LLC, a total of more than $660 million.
Energy Transfer retained lawyers from international law firm Gibson and Dunn. The lawsuit’s lead attorney, Trey Cox, gave a statement after the verdict Wednesday.
“This victory is a triumph for many. We hope this condemnation of Greenpeace will bring some measure of healing and closure to the Morton County community [where the sometimes violent protests occurred] and the entire state of North Dakota,” Cox told reporters outside the courthouse. “While Energy Transfer and DAPL were victorious in the courtroom, this is a resounding win for the people of Bismarck, Mandan, and Morton County, as well as the law enforcement officers across this state who diligently worked and risked their lives to maintain order.”
Statements made after courts ruling in the Greenpeace-Energy Transfer lawsuit
Cox also said Wednesday’s verdict was aligned with the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment, though Greenpeace has said the lawsuit could have a chilling effect on free speech.
“[Today] is a day of celebration for the Constitution, the state of North Dakota and Energy Transfer,” Cox said. “This verdict serves as a powerful affirmation of the First Amendment. Peaceful protest is an inherent American right; however, violent and destructive protest is unlawful and unacceptable.”
In 2016 and 2017, Dakota Access LLC installed the Dakota Access Pipeline, a near 1,200-mile crude oil pipeline running from shale fields in North Dakota to Illinois. What began as a small protest to the pipeline by some members of The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe for environmental and cultural reasons quickly grew in size and scope.
The sometimes violent protests garnered international attention and drew more than 100,000 people to the area from April 2016 through most of February 2017. Greenpeace supported the protests with funding and other support. Energy Transfer blamed the environmental group for some of the unlawful acts that took place there including vandalism – as well as for the eventual decision of nearly half the pipeline’s investors to reduce or end their commitment to the project.
Though the decision was a blow to Greenpeace, its team of attorneys remained confident after the verdict the environmental group’s work would continue. Greenpeace had said the $300 million figure could bring about its financial ruin, but Senior Legal Advisor for Greenpeace USA Deepa Padmanabha said the organization would find a way to carry on its work.
“The work of Greenpeace is never going to stop. That’s the really important message today,” said Padmanabha. “We’re just walking out, [but] we’re going to get together and figure out what our next steps are.”
The organization has countersued Energy Transfer in the Netherlands, claiming the U.S. lawsuit was an attempt to silent lawful protests.
Padmanabha said the trial showed Energy Transfer’s willingness to dismiss the concerns of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, a claim Energy Transfer said is untrue.
“What we saw these past few weeks was Energy Transfer’s blatant disregard for the voices of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe,” she told reporters.
But she said that regardless of the verdict, Greenpeace’s character showed through in the trial.
“While they also tried to rewrite Greenpeace’s story, what this trial showed was Greenpeace’s unwavering commitment to nonviolence in every action that we take,” Padmanabha said.
The jury disagreed.
The judge indicated after the verdict that he would meet with the parties to confirm the jury’s damage award. It was unclear Wednesday if there would be any possibility for negotiation.
Greenpeace says it plans to appeal the decision.
