A North Dakota jury has delivered a decisive verdict against Greenpeace, awarding Energy Transfer over $660 million in damages for the activist group’s role in defamation, conspiracy, and inciting destruction during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests. The ruling sends a clear message: corporate sabotage disguised as “activism” will no longer be tolerated.
For years, Energy Transfer faced relentless attacks from Greenpeace and its allies, who escalated a local dispute into a national spectacle of chaos. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, backed by professional agitators, argued that the pipeline endangered sacred land and water supplies. Yet, the economic benefits—including jobs and energy security—were largely ignored in favor of disruptive protests. Greenpeace, hiding behind free speech protections, fueled the unrest by funding and training demonstrators while spreading falsehoods about the pipeline’s impact.
The jury in Mandan, North Dakota—one of the communities most affected by the mayhem—saw through Greenpeace’s defense. After two days of deliberation, they not only agreed with Energy Transfer’s $340 million claim but imposed additional punitive damages, bringing the total judgment to over $660 million. Trespass, defamation, and conspiracy were just some of the charges Greenpeace failed to shake.
🚨🇺🇸 GREENPEACE HIT WITH MASSIVE VERDICT OVER DAKOTA ACCESS PIPELINE PROTESTS
A North Dakota jury just handed Greenpeace a costly defeat, ruling the group defamed Energy Transfer and awarding the pipeline company hundreds of millions in damages.
Energy Transfer argued… pic.twitter.com/nuhGDeDifo
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) March 19, 2025
Unsurprisingly, Greenpeace is now portraying itself as the victim, warning that the ruling could cripple its U.S. operations. Many see this as long-overdue accountability for an organization that has operated without consequence for far too long. “Peaceful protest is an American right,” said Trey Cox, lead attorney for Energy Transfer. “But what Greenpeace did—funding destruction and smearing a company that keeps our country running—that’s not protest, that’s sabotage.”
Kelcy Warren, Energy Transfer’s chairman and a vocal Trump supporter, made it clear that his company would not be bullied by radical environmentalists. “We’ve got to stand up for ourselves,” he stated in a deposition played for the jury. The Dakota Access Pipeline, a vital component of America’s energy infrastructure, has been operational since 2017. Despite Greenpeace’s efforts to derail the project, it continues to transport oil critical to U.S. energy independence.
Greenpeace predictably claims the lawsuit is an attack on free speech. “This threatens our right to peaceful protest,” said Greenpeace attorney Deepa Padmanabha. But the trial evidence told a different story. The jury saw how Greenpeace provided financial and logistical support to protesters who engaged in vandalism and disruption. Equipment was destroyed, private property was damaged, and law enforcement resources were strained. “They thought they’d never get caught,” Cox told jurors. “Now they’ll pay.”
OUTRAGE: A Big Oil-stacked jury just sided with corporate power, slapping @Greenpeace with millions in damages for standing with Indigenous water protectors against DAPL. This is a dangerous attack on the right to protest, but the fight is not over. https://t.co/CaMOr7TCVQ
— The CCR is on bsky (@ccrjustice.org) (@theCCR) March 19, 2025
For conservatives and energy advocates, this case represents more than just legal justice—it’s a broader rejection of radical environmentalism. The Dakota Access Pipeline symbolizes energy independence, an issue that resonates deeply in North Dakota and beyond. While Greenpeace pushes for unreliable wind and solar solutions, communities that rely on domestic oil production understand its necessity. This verdict is a sign that Americans are no longer willing to accept economic sabotage in the name of activism.
Greenpeace has vowed to appeal, claiming the lawsuit is a “SLAPP suit” designed to silence dissent. But with a jury of ordinary Americans seeing through their tactics, their chances of overturning the ruling appear slim. Meanwhile, Energy Transfer stands firm, a testament to the resilience of industries that refuse to bow to activist intimidation.
