(TheIndependentStar.com) – A North Dakota jury has struck a major blow against radical environmentalism by ordering Greenpeace to pay over $650 million.
The verdict benefits Energy Transfer and stems from Grenpeace’s defamatory actions during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests.
The case centered on protests that began during President Donald Trump’s first term.
Specifically, Greenpeace engaged in activities that Energy Transfer successfully argued constituted defamation, trespass, nuisance, and civil conspiracy.
The Texas-based oil company initially sought $300 million in damages, but the jury awarded more than double that amount after just two days of deliberation.
Located roughly 100 miles from where the protests occurred, the court found Greenpeace USA liable on all counts.
Meanwhile, the group’s parent organization and funding arm were found liable on some charges.
Energy Transfer founder Kelcy Warren did not mince words about why his company pursued legal action against the environmental group. “It was time to fight back,” said Warren.
The Dakota Access Pipeline has been operational since 2017, providing crucial energy transport capabilities for American oil producers.
Greenpeace played a role in protests that drew over 10,000 people, including Native American tribes, celebrities, and left-wing political figures who opposed the infrastructure project.
Throughout the trial, Greenpeace attempted to distance itself from the protests’ leadership, claiming it merely provided non-violent training rather than masterminding the demonstrations.
The jury clearly did not buy this explanation, recognizing the organization’s substantial role in the disruptions that cost Energy Transfer millions.
Greenpeace representatives are now crying foul, claiming the verdict could force them into bankruptcy in the United States and end over 50 years of their activism.
The group’s legal team has already announced plans to appeal, characterizing the case as an attack on free speech rather than accountability for their actions.
Left-wing activists criticized the trial, claiming jurors were biased because many had ties to the fossil fuel industry.
Energy Transfer’s lawsuit follows a pattern of businesses finally standing up to environmental extremism.
A previously filed federal RICO lawsuit was dismissed before the company successfully pursued claims in North Dakota state court.
The verdict represents a significant victory for energy independence advocates, who believe radical environmentalists have escaped the consequences of their actions for too long.
Meanwhile, Greenpeace has counter-sued Energy Transfer in a Dutch court, claiming the American company is misusing the legal system to silence critics.
This tactic appears designed to move litigation to a more favorable jurisdiction after losing decisively in a fair American trial.
Copyright 2025, TheIndependentStar.com
