A jury has ordered the environmentalism group Greenpeace to pay over $660 million in damages over protests against the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline.
A North Dakota jury found Greenpeace liable in a lawsuit against the organization.
The lawsuit was filed by Dallas-based Energy Transfer and its subsidiary Dakota Access.
Netherlands-based Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, and their funding arm Greenpeace Fund Inc., were accused of defamation, trespass, nuisance, civil conspiracy, and other acts.
Greenpeace USA was found liable for all counts, while the others were found liable for some.
The damages owed will be spread out in different amounts over the three entities.
In a news release, Greenpeace called the lawsuit “meritless.”
Sushma Raman, the interim executive director of Greenpeace Fund Inc., said:
“This case should alarm everyone, no matter their political inclinations.
“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.”
Greenpeace said earlier that a large award to the pipeline company would threaten to bankrupt the organization.
After the verdict, Deepa Padmanabha, Greenpeace’s senior legal adviser, said the group’s work “is never going to stop.”
“That’s the really important message today, and we’re just walking out and we’re going to get together and figure out what our next steps are,” she said outside the courthouse.
Greenpeace said it plans to appeal the decision.
Energy Transfer called Wednesday’s verdict a “win” for “Americans who understand the difference between the right to free speech and breaking the law.”
In a statement, the company said:
“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.”
Energy Transfer said the lawsuit wasn’t about free speech.
Instead, the company said the lawsuit was about protestors not following the law.
The case stems from protests in 2016 and 2017 against the multi-state Dakota Access oil pipeline.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe opposed the project.
The tribe argued that it posed a risk to its water supply and imposed harm on their land.
Thousands of protesters camped for months near the Standing Rock Reservation, where the pipeline crosses underneath the Missouri River.
The pipeline transports about 5% of the United States’ daily oil production.
It started transporting oil in mid-2017.
Free speech and environmental advocates have criticized the trial.
They argue that the lawsuit was about silencing protesters and bankrupting opponents.
READ MORE – Greenpeace Founder: Anti-Carbon Dioxide Agenda Is a Hoax
