Greenpeace Faces Bankruptcy Risk in Upcoming U.S. Pipeline Trial
Getty Images
Nearly a decade ago, protesters rallied behind the slogan “Water is Life.” Now, a lawsuit brought by an energy company over the Dakota Access Pipeline could threaten to dismantle Greenpeace.
The Texas-based Energy Transfer company claims that protest tactics employed by Greenpeace delayed the project’s progress. The pipeline began transporting oil in 2017 following support from President Donald Trump during his first term. Protests against the pipeline near Standing Rock Sioux Reservation garnered widespread attention, though Greenpeace did not lead them.
However, this lawsuit poses a significant threat to free speech and could potentially bankrupt Greenpeace if it loses. The trial in North Dakota is set to last five weeks, beginning with jury selection on Monday. Energy Transfer’s lawsuit accuses Greenpeace of an “unlawful and violent scheme” designed to cause financial harm to the company, physical harm to its employees and infrastructure, and disruption of construction efforts.
If ordered to pay approximately $300 million in damages, Greenpeace could be forced into bankruptcy, ending over 50 years of environmental activism. This trial is taking place in a conservative state with strong ties to the oil industry – North Dakota’s former governor now leads a federal agency on public lands for the Trump administration.
The pipeline construction gained international attention during Trump’s first term as Native American groups attempted to block it near Standing Rock Reservation. The protests began in April 2016 and ended in February 2017 when law enforcement cleared the protest site, with a peak of over ten thousand protesters present. Over two hundred separate Native American tribes joined the cause along with hundreds of US military veterans, actors, and political leaders – including current health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr.
During these protests, hundreds were arrested; authorities faced allegations of excessive force involving pepper spray, freezing water as well as firing sound cannons, bean-bag rounds, and rubber bullets. Greenpeace argues that their role was limited to supporting “nonviolent direct-action training” rather than leading the protest group itself.
The lawsuit targets Greenpeace USA along with its funding arm Greenpeace Fund Inc., based in Washington DC, and Amsterdam-based parent organization Greenpeace International. In response to this legal action, Greenpeace has initiated a counter-suit against Energy Transfer (ET) in Dutch court. This suit aims to recover all damages and costs suffered due to ET’s repeated baseless lawsuits.
