A jury last year found three Greenpeace entities liable in a lawsuit brought by the Dallas-based energy company Energy Transfer and awarded more than $660 million (€559 million) in damages. Judge James Gion later reduced the award by nearly half, but once his formal order is entered, both sides are expected to appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court. Energy Transfer, a $64 billion conglomerate that operates thousands of kilometres of pipelines across 44 US states, has objected to the reduction. Greenpeace USA, meanwhile, has acknowledged that its cash and assets are nowhere near the scale of the damages originally awarded.
Greenpeace International’s General Counsel, Kristin Casper, has stated that the organisation will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court. Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, and the Greenpeace Fund Inc. have all said they will continue their environmental advocacy regardless of the outcome. The Netherlands-based Greenpeace International operates as part of a global network active in more than 55 countries, describing itself as an independent campaigning organisation that uses peaceful protest and creative confrontation to address environmental challenges.
Founded in 1971 in Canada by activists opposing US nuclear weapons testing in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, Greenpeace began with a symbolic voyage to “bear witness” to a nuclear test. Although intercepted by the Coast Guard, the campaign gained attention and contributed to the eventual halt of testing in the area. Over the decades, Greenpeace has become known for high-profile direct actions, including confronting whaling vessels, scaling industrial structures to protest pollution, occupying oil platforms, and staging demonstrations at prominent political locations.
The current legal battle stems from protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota. The pipeline project faced strong opposition from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, which argued that it threatened its water supply near the Missouri River. The protests in 2016 and 2017 drew thousands of demonstrators and led to hundreds of arrests. Energy Transfer alleged that Greenpeace played a central role in organising and escalating the protests, accusing the group of defamation, conspiracy, trespass, nuisance, and other claims. Greenpeace has denied these allegations, describing the lawsuit as an attempt to silence activism through legal pressure.
The jury ultimately found Greenpeace USA liable on all counts, while the other two entities were held liable on some claims. With appeals expected, the case raises significant questions about the financial and operational future of one of the world’s most prominent environmental organisations, as well as the broader implications for activism and corporate litigation.
