A $300 million lawsuit by Energy Transfer Partners against Greenpeace is set to begin today in North Dakota, with experts warning the case could stifle free speech and activism.
In short:
- Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the Dakota Access pipeline, accuses Greenpeace of defamation and inciting criminal activity during 2016-2017 protests led by Indigenous groups.
- Legal experts call the case a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP), aimed at silencing critics through costly litigation rather than seeking legitimate damages.
- The trial is raising concerns about judicial bias, with Greenpeace’s requests to change venue or livestream proceedings denied, and local mailers appearing to influence public opinion.
Key quote:
“This case feels more like a trophy hunt and an attempt to shut down free speech rather than an actual good faith attempt to seek remedies for harm.”
— Kirk Herbertson, attorney and U.S. director for advocacy and campaigns at EarthRights International
Why this matters:
SLAPP lawsuits have become a powerful tool for corporations and wealthy individuals to intimidate activists, journalists, and advocacy groups. This case could set a precedent for how courts handle free speech protections, especially in environmental and Indigenous rights activism. The Dakota Access pipeline, long opposed by the Standing Rock Sioux, continues to operate despite legal challenges over its environmental risks. If Energy Transfer prevails, it may embolden other fossil fuel companies to target critics with similar lawsuits, further chilling public dissent.
Read more: Greenpeace USA leadership faces turmoil amid lawsuit
