Energy Transfer, one of the companies behind the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, convinced a North Dakota jury Wednesday to award the company $667 million in damages in a defamation lawsuit that stemmed from violent protests over the construction of the pipeline.
"We are very pleased that Greenpeace has been held accountable for their actions against us,” Vicki Granado, a spokeswoman for Energy Transfer, told Cowboy State Daily in an email. “Our victory is also a win is also 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.”
Greenpeace countersued Energy Transfer in the Netherlands, where the group is based.
On Thursday, Greenpeace responded by email to questions from Cowboy State Daily about the damages and case, which has taken years to move through the court system.
“This case should alarm everyone, no matter their political inclinations,” said Sushma Raman, interim executive director for Greenpeace Inc., Greenpeace Fund. “It’s part of a renewed push by corporations to weaponize our courts to silence dissent.”
The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is a 1,172-mile-long underground crude oil pipeline linking the Bakken region of North Dakota to Patoka, Illinois.
The pipeline became a national focal point for a prolonged 10-month protest from April 2016 through February 2017, when the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe said the project threatened the water supply on its reservation.
It drew large groups of protesters whose extended camping at the site damaged the land and created a policing and cleanup nightmare.
In court documents, Energy Transfer asserted that, “Greenpeace USA and Earth First! organized, funded, and supported unlawful acts of trespass, property destruction, and violence by protestors to obstruct construction and operation of DAPL.”
Greenpeace countered that the legal action was a SLAPP lawsuit, which stands for strategic lawsuit against public participation. This is a topic that was recently debated by Wyoming lawmakers.
SLAPP Back
During the recently concluded Wyoming legislative session, lawmakers considered a bill that would have made it harder to file SLAPP lawsuits, but it died in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
House Bill 223, sponsored by Rep. Pepper Ottman, R-Riverton, aspired to make it more difficult for a plaintiff with deep pockets and lawyers on retainer to use that financial advantage to file these types of lawsuits.
It sought to, according to language in the bill, protect the “exercise of the constitutional right of petition, freedom of speech or freedom of expression in connection with any matter of public concern.”
The bill would have made it easier for those hit with a SLAPP suit to “to dismiss or otherwise dispose of the case or lawsuit as expeditiously as possible.”
Colin Crossman, the head of the business division for the Wyoming Secretary of State’s office, but speaking in his personal capacity, told Cowboy State Daily Thursday that HB 223 would have required anyone bringing a SLAPP suit to show proof earlier in the process.
“This just creates a little bit more of a barrier in these situations where protected speech is not actionable, but it also preserves the fact that defamation is a serious, serious issue,” said Crossman, who as a business owner and attorney has experienced both sides of defamation lawsuits as a defendant and a plaintiff.
“The power imbalance is such that it's a chilling effect,” said Crossman, bringing up a point expressed by Greenpeace after news of the $667 million verdict against the group.
“Big Oil Bullies around the world will continue to try to silence free speech and peaceful protest, but the fight against Energy Transfer’s meritless SLAPP lawsuit is not over,” wrote Madison Carter, senior communications specialist, in a Wednesday statement.
Carter also pointed to a letter of support from “upwards of 8 million members” that stated “while many union members work on pipelines, and many disagreed with the content of the protests, we are united in our wholehearted support of the right to protest."
Energy Transfer maintains its lawsuit was not a meritless SLAPP action, stating through a spokesperson, “That the disrupters have been held responsible is a win for all of us."
Protecting Infrastructure
Industry response to Greenpeace’s actions in North Dakota point to the economic benefits of the pipeline.
“The Dakota Access Pipeline created approximately 8,000 to 12,000 jobs during construction,” according to Energy Transfer, which touts that between 2015-2020, the pipeline paid more than $112.7 million in property taxes.
In the aftermath of the protests over the pipeline, North Dakota passed a law aimed at preventing future direct-action protests and protecting energy infrastructure.
“Incapacitating an operator of a critical infrastructure facility or a public service,” became illegal in North Dakota in 2019.
Attempts in Wyoming to pass similar legislation have failed.
David Madison can be reached at david@cowboystatedaily.com.
