Des membres de la tribu sioux de Standing Rock Sioux et des manifestants venus les soutenir s’opposent à la construction d’un tronçon du Dakota Access Pipeline le 3 septembre 2016 près de Cannon Ball dans le Dakota du Nord ( AFP / Robyn BECK )
A North Dakota judge has upheld a $345 million judgment against Greenpeace, ordering the environmental organization to pay damages to the operator of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The ruling, confirmed Friday, stems from protests against the pipeline’s construction years earlier.
The unprecedented financial penalty poses an existential threat to the well-known environmental group, which contends that an American oil company is attempting to silence it through financial ruin. This case highlights the increasing legal challenges faced by environmental organizations as they confront powerful energy interests.
Michael Gerrard, a Columbia University law professor specializing in climate justice litigation, described the judgment as “a devastating blow” not only to Greenpeace but also to the global environmental movement.
Greenpeace, which has stated it is unable to pay the sum, intends to appeal the decision.
“Protesting companies that harm the environment should never be considered illegal,” said Marco Simons of Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace Fund in a statement.
Mads Christensen of Greenpeace International added, “We will not be silenced.”
– “Reduce to Silence” –
The Friday ruling validates a jury’s decision in March 2025, which found three Greenpeace entities responsible for the majority of accusations leveled by Energy Transfer and assessed damages exceeding $665 million.
The judge later reduced the amount, determining some damages had been duplicated, but the final figure remains substantial.
Energy Transfer accused Greenpeace of playing a central role in large-scale protests in 2016 and 2017 opposing the pipeline’s construction. Greenpeace and Indigenous representatives involved in the protests refuted these claims.
The company sued three Greenpeace entities, including its international and U.S. Branches, alleging defamation, nuisance, and trespass, and sought a record-setting indemnity.
The protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline resulted in hundreds of arrests and injuries.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and environmental groups, including Greenpeace, joined by thousands of demonstrators, attempted to block construction of a pipeline section they said would cross sacred sites and threaten their drinking water.
– “Dissuade” –
Energy Transfer initially sought $300 million in damages to compensate for the harm it claimed to have suffered during the protests.
During the trial, the requested compensation more than doubled, with the intention, according to Energy Transfer attorney Trey Cox as cited by the North Dakota Monitor, to “dissuade Greenpeace and other organizations from acting in the same way in the future.”
Energy Transfer has not yet commented on the ruling.
Allie Rosenbluth of Oil Change International responded to the decision, stating, “These intimidation lawsuits will not stop people from opposing big oil companies to protect their communities and the planet.”
This was the second legal action brought by Energy Transfer against Greenpeace, following the dismissal of a previous lawsuit in federal court in 2019.
Greenpeace, determined to counter the legal pressure, initiated a lawsuit against the company in the Netherlands, where its international headquarters is located, in 2025, citing European legislation against abusive legal proceedings.
The organization is seeking reimbursement for the costs incurred in these legal battles.
