North Dakota Jury Orders Greenpeace to Pay Pipeline Company More Than $660 Million
“Midwestern Burning Man” was no peaceful protest, but a transition state to the domestic-terror style ‘advocacy’ eco-extremists are now targeting Tesla with.
Legal Insurrection readers may recall our 2016 reports on the Dakota Access Pipeline protests, also known as the Standing Rock protests or #NoDAPL, which were supposedly a series of ‘grassroots’ demonstrations led by Native Americans against the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline in the northern United States.
I termed it “Burning Man of the Midwest,” not only for the poor sanitation but also for the reports that most of the protesters were white and that some demonstrators used racial slurs against black, Hispanic, and American Indian officers.
Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault II, who is leading the protest, raised concerns about sanitation in a Nov. 23 interview with Vice, saying activists are “digging pits out there for their human waste.”
“That’s a flood zone,” said Mr. Archambault, referring to camps on federal land along the Cannonball River. “So when the floodwaters come up, that waste is going to be contaminating the water. We’re no different than the oil company, if we’re fighting for water. What’s going to happen when people leave? Who has to clean it up? Who has to refurbish it? It’s going to be us, the people who live here.”
Eventually, the protesters were evicted due to pollution concerns.
Subsequently, Energy Transfer, the pipeline company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline, sued Greenpeace over the protests in 2016 and 2017. The pipeline went nuclear on the eco-activist group and targeted three Greenpeace entities: Greenpeace International (based in the Netherlands), Greenpeace USA, and Greenpeace Fund Inc. (the organization’s funding arm).
In the lawsuit, the pipeline company claimed that Greenpeace:
- Orchestrated the protests to stop the pipeline’s construction
- Paid outsiders to join the demonstrations
- Supplied blockade materials
- Organized or led protester training sessions
- Made false statements about the project to impede its progress
Greenpeace countered that the organization’s involvement was minimal.
Everett Jack Jr., the lead lawyer for Greenpeace, gave a detailed timeline to rebut aspects of that account, saying Greenpeace played a minor role in the demonstrations, which drew an estimated 100,000 people to the rural area.
…He said two staff members had arrived two days after that confrontation, in order to bring a solar truck to provide electricity. Mr. Jack said Greenpeace was committed to nonviolence and got involved not to incite unrest, but rather to help “de-escalate” and provide aid like tents and training. He told the jury there was no evidence to support the contention that Greenpeace was responsible for the protests.
After hearing the arguments, the North Dakota jury sided with Energy Transfer’s case and ordered Greenpeace to pay a staggering $660 million.
A North Dakota jury on Wednesday found Greenpeace liable for millions of dollars in damages to a giant pipeline company in relation to protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline nearly a decade ago.
Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners sued Greenpeace for $300 million in 2019, accusing the environmental group of masterminding the protests, spreading misinformation and causing the company financial loss through damaged property and lost revenues.
After a three-week trial, the 9-person jury took two days to return their verdict.
Now, it turns out many media types are decrying this verdict, because it is going to chill “future climate advocacy”.
Greenpeace hit with $667 million judgement.
"…massive financial blow to the group that environmentalists say could chill future climate advocacy" pic.twitter.com/obB3oD3oKb
— Ryan Maue (@RyanMaue) March 19, 2025
However, “Midwestern Burning Man” was no peaceful protest but a transition state to the domestic-terror style ‘advocacy’ eco-extremists are now targeting Tesla with.
This judgement is being celebrated by “normies” and, hopefully it will actually chill the destruction of private property and violence-based intimidation tactics that have been adopted by Marxists/socialists power-mongers parading as “climate advocates”.
Good news. $660 million penalty. I was threatened with physical violence by a senior guy at Greenpeace for quoting an MIT professor who questioned “global warming.”https://t.co/2YQhIXUSLo
— Jock Spivy (@JockSpivy) March 20, 2025
Greenpeace indicates it could be forced into bankruptcy over the verdict.
It appears the only ones who will miss the group are mainstream media and those interested in preserving their climate of political power.
Bye bye, Greenpeace.
Turns out you weren’t very peaceful.
Enjoy paying that Green cash all the way to bankruptcy. #greenpeace pic.twitter.com/BrFsGj2QCh— Joe M (@JoeM_NZ) March 19, 2025
I am looking forward to reporting on the completion of the pipeline.
I have captured an image of the most recent Greenpeace event. pic.twitter.com/aoJbMgiHkG
— Leslie Eastman ☥ (@Mutnodjmet) March 20, 2025
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
It’s about time these grifters got a dose of reality. In order to appeal they will have to put up a bond. That alone could bankrupt them. And they can’t look to their friends in DC to shovel a grant their way to help them out in their time of need. Next in line should be the grifters at the Sierra Club.
Good wins a round over anti civilization forces.
We still don’t have a pipeline.
But it’s a nice small step on the path back towards sanity.
“Greenpeace indicates it could be forced into bankruptcy over the verdict.”
Cue Jeremy Clarkson.
Ironic that what’s going to do Greenpeace in is exactly the thing they’ve been accusing others of doing to achieve their Malthusian goals. It truly is a thing of beauty – you have to stop and just appreciate it.
Greenpeace is second only to Planned Parenthood (because if you had planned, you wouldn’t be here and when you leave you won’t be a parent) in the race for most Orwellian group name.
When your founder no longer shares your vision, perhaps that’s a cue that you’ve lost the message. Greenpeace didn’t listen and will now suffer the consequences.
These knuckleheads still don’t seem to be able to distinguish between lawfully protesting and criminal acts/basic torts disguised as protests. Hopefully paying the judgements will help clarify the difference for them.
Characterizing this as a ‘defamation’ claim – which is how most mainstream media stories have – while strictly true in part, really does a disservice to the actual facts of this case. The behavior of these eco-terrorists went WELL beyond defaming words about the pipeline company. The defendants engaged in systematic physical assaults on company property, terrorism in every sense of the word.
NPR’s coverage is notably and predictably dreadful, reading like a press release from Greenpeace. Did NPR worry about ‘chilling free speech’ when Fox News and Alex Jones were hit with nearly $2B in damages for ‘defamation,’ two cases where there was ZERO physical damage suffered by any of the plaintiffs?
This comment sat in moderation for a day for a reason I simply cannot understand. What word in those two paragraphs would have triggered moderation?
“We weren’t involved a lot!” is laughable on its face because bringing up to 100,000 people to an area that could be in the dictionary under the definition of “middle of nowhere” in a state which usually gets the reaction from outsiders of “Isn’t it really cold there?” without significant amounts of organizational support and $$$ assistance is ludicrous.
I’m sure Greenpeace will appeal to the ND Supreme Court, and at least one of the judge’s pre-trial decisions will be part of it. They brought him in from another county, but one of the significant decisions he made was ruling not to move it out of the county where the protests happened. Greenpeace wanted to move it to Fargo, the biggest city in the state, to get a “fairer trial”, which is more like them thinking they stood a better chance of getting at least one and maybe a few jurors who (a) moved to the state in the years since the protests, and/or (b) may be more sympathetic to their cause.
Greenpeace loves to damage native property. In addition to sponsoring tons of trash left behind in ND, they damaged the Nazca Lines in Peru a decade ago. The judgement couldn’t happen to a better bunch of lily white assholes.
Greenpeace protestors at the pipeline were totally and solely concerned about protecting the environment – NOT.
“On February 22, 2017, the protest site was cleared. Although many left voluntarily, ten people were arrested. On February 23, National Guard and law enforcement officers evicted the remaining protesters. Thirty-three people were arrested. After the protest site was abandoned, sanitation crews cleared garbage from the protest; this included abandoned cars and human waste. Also abandoned were 12 dogs. North Dakota Department of Emergency Services estimated that about 21 million pounds of garbage was removed; the cost of cleaning up the protest site was about $1 million. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_Access_Pipeline_protests
It was smart to go after every arm.
These protesters try to tell us that this pipeline will ruin the environment. The reality is the opposite; this pipeline is the safest way to move Bakken crude. Consider the Lac-Mégantic Quebec rail disaster which occurred on July 6, 2013. A train shipping Bakken crude rolled down a grade into the town derailing and catching fire. Forty seven people were killed (42 confirmed and 5 presumed). This type of accident cannot occur with a pipeline.
As long as the world consumes oil, pipelines such as the Dakota Access Pipeline are the best way to transport it. And American crude is preferrable to Venezuelan or Russian crude since their environmental protection is inferior to ours.
Patience pays off. Finally!
.
It’s too easy for Greenpeace to transfer its assets thereby making any monetary judgment empty. Hopefully, the plaintiff can find some assets and restrain them before they evaporate.
It’s a shame they can use bankruptcy.
Leftists: Your speech is violence!
Also leftists: Our violence is free speech!
The verdict: Pay up suckahs. $660 meellion.
These civil judgments are fine, but if GP did collude, conspire, commit violence and destruction, aren’t those crimes. Shouldn’t someone be in prison already?
Am I missing something?
My heart soars like an eagle!
The way to hit leftists/Dhimmi-crats and their organizing/funding operations, hard, is aggressive litigation when supported by facts and law.
In the outcome of this case, I’m seeing shades of Chevron’s successful lawsuit against a shady/greasy, prominent Dhimmi-crat lawyer, who bribed a judge in Ecuador to issue a massive judgment against Chevron for environmental contamination that the company had nothing to do with.
Presumably Greenpeace will appeal. Will they need to file a bond for the amount of the judgement (like what happened in the Gibson’s Bakery case)?
Maybe grifter Greta can donate a few million $ to help pay the settlement.
anyone born in the usa is a native
stop allowing lefty to control the narrative with their invectives
What a bunch of tools.
Who needs “future climate advocacy” when their massive, violent efforts to take down the leading EV manufacturer proves it is all BS?
Leave a Comment