Greenpeace, the international environmental organization known for its bold and often controversial activism, recently found itself at the center of a legal battle that could potentially cripple its operations. In a David versus Goliath scenario, the organization stood with the water protectors of Standing Rock, North Dakota, in their fight against the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. However, their support came at a hefty cost – a $666 million court judgment.
The story began in 2016 when the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, along with other indigenous groups and environmental activists, set up camp to protest the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The pipeline, which was set to transport crude oil through sacred Native American land and under the Missouri River, was seen as a threat to the water supply and a violation of tribal sovereignty.
Greenpeace, known for its staunch stance against fossil fuels and the protection of indigenous rights, joined the protest in solidarity. The organization provided resources, volunteers, and media coverage to amplify the voices of the water protectors and bring attention to the issue.
Their involvement did not go unnoticed by the pipeline’s parent company, Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), who filed a lawsuit against Greenpeace and other environmental groups, accusing them of inciting violence and damaging their business. The lawsuit, which was filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, sought $900 million in damages.
The case went to trial in 2019, and after months of legal battles, a federal jury found Greenpeace and its co-defendants guilty of conspiracy and inciting violence. The jury awarded ETP $666 million in damages, a staggering amount that could potentially bankrupt the organization.
However, Greenpeace did not back down. The organization immediately filed an appeal, calling the judgment a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) and a violation of their First Amendment rights. They also accused ETP of using the lawsuit as a means to silence and intimidate environmental activists.
The appeal gained support from various organizations and individuals, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio and Susan Sarandon. The support highlighted the importance of protecting the right to protest and the dangers of using lawsuits to silence dissent.
In July 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned the $666 million judgment, stating that it violated the First Amendment and was an attempt to silence free speech. The court also called the lawsuit a “classic SLAPP” and ordered ETP to pay Greenpeace’s legal fees.
The victory was a significant win for Greenpeace and the larger environmental movement. It sent a clear message that corporations cannot use lawsuits to silence activists and that the right to protest is protected under the First Amendment.
Greenpeace’s Executive Director, Annie Leonard, celebrated the decision, stating, “This win is a victory for democracy and the right to speak truth to power. It sends a message to corporations that they cannot use the legal system to bully and silence those who stand up against their destructive practices.”
The organization’s involvement in the Standing Rock protest and the subsequent legal battle has also shed light on the growing trend of SLAPP lawsuits. These lawsuits are often used by corporations to intimidate and silence activists and community groups who oppose their actions.
Greenpeace has vowed to continue standing with communities and fighting for environmental justice, despite the risks and challenges they may face. The organization’s dedication to its principles and the courage to stand up against powerful entities is a testament to the importance of their work.
In the end, the inside story of how Greenpeace stood with water protectors and faced a $666 million court judgment is a story of resilience, determination, and the power of standing up for what is right. It is a reminder that the fight for a better and more sustainable world is not an easy one, but it is a fight worth fighting.
