Greenpeace ordered to pay $660 million over pipeline protests
In their lawsuit, Dallas-based Energy Transfer claimed Greenpeace was responsible for defamation, disruption and property damage for the protests that captured national attention in 2016. Greenpeace claimed the lawsuit threatened its freedom of speech.
In a statement, Energy Transfer said, "This win is really for the people of Mandan and throughout North Dakota who had to live through the daily harassment and disruptions caused by the protesters who were funded and trained by Greenpeace. It is also a win for all law-abiding Americans who understand the difference between the right to free speech and breaking the law."
Greenpeace plans to appeal the verdict. "This is the end of a chapter, but not the end of our fight. Energy Transfer knows we don't have $660 million. They want our silence, not our money." Sushma Raman, interim executive director of Greenpeace Inc., told CBS News.
Greenpeace accused Energy Transfer of filing a "SLAPP" lawsuit, short for strategic lawsuits against public participation. SLAPP lawsuits have been criticized as being a method of curtailing free speech and assembly by individuals, organizations or press by threatening lengthy and expensive legal proceedings in court. 35 states have anti-SLAPP laws aimed at preventing these types of lawsuits. North Dakota is not among them.
Energy Transfer previously filed a federal RICO lawsuit against Greenpeace seeking $300 million in damages in 2017, but that case was dismissed by a federal judge. Energy Transfer then filed a lawsuit against Greenpeace in North Dakota state court shortly after.
"The verdict against Greenpeace not only represents an assault on free speech and protest rights," said Rebecca Brown, president and CEO of the Center for International and Environmental Law, in a statement. "This case is a textbook example of corporate weaponization of the legal system to silence protest and intimidate communities. This misuse of the legal system stifles legitimate dissent and must be seen as a direct threat to environmental justice and democratic freedoms."
In the weeks and months preceding the trial, Greenpeace raised the alarm that the damages sought by Energy Transfer, thought at the time to be in the $300 million range, would be catastrophic to the group, claiming that would amount to 10 times the group's annual U.S. operating budget. Energy Transfer reported over $82 billion in revenue in 2024.
The damages ultimately awarded total roughly $667 million and will be split up among several arms of Greenpeace. Greenpeace USA is on the hook for about $404 million, while Greenpeace Fund Inc. and Greenpeace International must each pay some $131 million, according to The Associated Press.
The 1,172-mile pipeline crosses four states and has been operating since late 2017 despite the controversy and the protest, which stemmed from a pipeline crossing under Lake Oahe near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe called the pipeline a violation of its treaty rights and claimed the pipeline route risked polluting the tribe's primary water source and would damage sacred sites.
The protests at Standing Rock drew thousands of people from around the country who camped outside the pipeline's construction site. Celebrities and prominent figures including now-Trump cabinet members Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard also visited the camp.
But violence erupted between police, security guards and protestors several times, culminating in tear gas and water cannons being used against protestors. The camps were cleared in February of 2017. More than 140 people were arrested at the Standing Rock protests.
One of the organizers of the protests was Chase Iron Eyes, an attorney for the Lakota People's Law Project, who was arrested during the demonstrations and charged with felony inciting a riot. Iron Eyes questioned Greenpeace's liability for the protests."I never met a single Greenpeace person, a representative, or ever went to a training or anything like that," Iron Eyes told CBS News. Instead, Iron Eyes found the ruling to delegitimize the concerns and agency of Native Americans who chose to protest at Standing Rock. "To hold them solely responsible for our fight, this is a tribal nation fight," he said. "I think it's disrespectful to tribal nations, to the Sioux Nation in particular, it was our nation, and our people who stood up."
Sneak peek: The Puzzling Death of Susann Sills
Inside Trump's call with Vladimir Putin
100 years since deadliest tornado in U.S. history
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
Texas redistricting war escalates across the country
The decision by Texas Democrats to flee the state has ratcheted up tensions and started a new phase in the redistricting war around the country. Democrats from the Lone Star State's legislature fled to Illinois, New York and Massachusetts starting Sunday to avoid giving Republicans the quorum needed to pass a highly unusual effort for partisan, mid-decade redistricting that could benefit them in next year's midterms. In response, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) ordered the arrest of the 'delinquent' Democrats, not long after Republicans in the state House passed a motion directing officials to bring them back to the state under warrant. 'Texas House Democrats abandoned their duty to Texans,' Abbott said in a statement Monday afternoon. 'By fleeing the state, Texas House Democrats are holding hostage critical legislation to aid flood victims and advance property tax relief. There are consequences for dereliction of duty.' The rapidly escalating tit-for-tat underscores how the redistricting battle has turned into an all-out national brawl ahead of what both parties expect to be a fiercely fought midterm election. 'Let's be clear, this is not just rigging the system in Texas,' Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) told reporters on Sunday, flanked by Texas Democrats. 'It's about rigging the system against the rights of all Americans for years to come.' The Texas Democrats' decision to break quorum — or the minimum number of lawmakers needed in order to conduct business in the legislature — came as Republicans look to advance an even friendly GOP congressional map that could net them five additional seats ahead of next year. The redistricting move was encouraged by President Trump as Republicans brace for an unfavorable political environment next year — and the possibility of Democratic investigations into his administration if the party loses the House. Democrats have portrayed the redistricting effort as a naked power grab by Republicans. The current map, authored by a Republican-dominated statehouse in 2021, gives Republicans 65 percent of the state congressional seats — a sizable advantage over the 55 percent of the state electorate who votes for the party. But if Trump gets the five additional seats he wants, that advantage would expand to 80 percent of the state's congressional House caucus — a 25-percent advantage secured with no additional need for persuasion. A Texas House panel advanced the House map last week, teeing it up for a floor vote. With Democrats out of the state, however, the efforts to pass the new map are temporarily stalled. In addition to the threats of arrest, Abbott also said he would strip lawmakers who failed to return to the state Capitol of their seats. Texas lawmakers already incur a daily $500 fine and threat of arrest for breaking quorum, and Abbott previously threatened them with bribery charges if national Democrats pick up the tab. 'Texans don't run from a fight — they face it head on,' Abbott wrote on X. 'These Texas Democrats that fled the state are not serving Texans. They are serving themselves. They forfeited their seats and are facing potential felony charges.' Speaking to reporters in Illinois on Sunday, Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair Gene Wu said they didn't make the decision lightly to leave the state, but added that this was 'absolutely the right thing to do to protect the people of the state of Texas.' Democratic leaders from across the country were quick to join in the fight. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has said he's weighing several options, including through a ballot measure or through the state legislature, over how to proceed as the Golden State eyes redrawing its own maps in response to Texas. Pritzker has vowed to protect lawmakers who traveled to his state from the threat of arrest from top Texas leaders. And while hosting several Texas Democrats in her state on Monday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) said she will explore different options available to redraw her state's maps. 'We're sick and tired of being pushed around when other states don't have the same aspirations that we always have had, and I hold those dear, but I cannot ignore that the playing field has changed dramatically,' Hochul said. 'And shame on us if we ignore that fact and cling tight to the vestiges of the past. That era is over.' The support from national Democrats, and the threats of arrest, mark a sea change from when Texas Democrats last left the state when Republicans engaged in mid-cycle redistricting in 2003. The decision then also occurred in response to a then-unprecedented mid-decade redistricting push by Republicans, which eventually transformed the state's congressional delegation from a comfortably Democratic majority to two-to-one Republican dominance — and locked in the GOP's generational control over the state legislature. The latest Texas battle comes as redistricting has become increasingly normalized by both sides. When Republicans took the state House for the first time in 2002, they took power despite generations of redistricting by the state's long-dominant Democratic majority — giving weight to arguments that they deserved their own stab at drawing new lines, Southern Methodist University historian Cal Jillson said. While Democrats have rebuked Texas GOP leaders for gerrymandering an already Republican-favored House map, the party has also been criticized for doing the same in states like New York and Illinois, both of which have hosted Texas lawmakers. In fact, a court struck down a map passed by New York Democrats in 2022 over partisan gerrymandering, mandating a court-appointed special master to draw the House lines instead. The broader redistricting tit-for-tat has also prompted a reversal among some Democrats around redistricting commissions, which were created with the intent to distance lawmakers from the process of drawing maps. At the same time, the redistricting battle has also created fissures within the GOP, some of whom are against mid-cycle redistricting. Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) is introducing legislation that would block new House maps from being implemented ahead of the next U.S. Census in 2030, though notably a statement from the California Republican only invoked Newsom. But the Republican argument that Texas redistricting is their means of addressing what they call an unfair national map marks how much things have changed. Unlike in 2003, 'you can't make the argument' that Republican redistricting is redressing an unfair map in Texas, Jillson said, because the gerrymandered maps the state GOP is now trying to redraw are ones that state Republicans drew just four years ago. Abbott and the majority of state congressional Republicans opposed redistricting, which they worried would threaten their seats — until Trump applied pressure, The Texas Tribune reported. 2024 Election Coverage Republicans also say there are risks involved, too, if Abbott tries to oust Democrats from their offices. 'So you take 'em out of office and you have elections, then you still don't have a quorum. Then you kind of basically shot yourself in the foot,' explained lobbyist and political consultant Bill Miller, who served on state Rep. Tom Craddick's (R) transition team in 2003 when Craddick was Texas House Speaker — and the architect of that year's bitter redistricting fight. 'The only thing that I would say from my experience is these wounds that are created by these fights don't heal easily, and they're remembered,' he said. 'A long time in ways that people forget.'
Newsweek
18 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Social Security Administrator Responds After Senator's Warning
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. New Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano has fired back at Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren over her criticism of the agency's changes and customer service in recent months. He defended the changes implemented under the Trump administration, saying the agency is "experiencing a customer service turnaround after four years of long wait times and record backlogs under the Biden administration." Why It Matters The Social Security Administration (SSA) has become the center of a national debate over the future of one of America's most vital safety net programs. Recent leadership and technology changes have prompted warnings from lawmakers, labor unions, advocates and former officials that millions of beneficiaries could soon face delays or interruptions in their monthly payments. At stake is the reliability of Social Security for more than 70 million Americans, especially older adults and people with disabilities, as the agency modernizes and manages its workforce under intense political scrutiny. Critics have focused their warnings on the rollout of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, office closures and staffing cutbacks, with Warren, of Massachusetts, previously raising alarms about access to benefits, transparency and program solvency for current and future retirees. A Social Security Administration (SSA) office in Washington, DC, March 26, 2025. A Social Security Administration (SSA) office in Washington, DC, March 26, 2025. SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images What To Know A group of senators including Ron Wyden, Democrat from Oregon; Bernie Sanders, independent from Vermont; Kirsten Gillibrand, a New York Democrat; and Warren previously sent a letter to Bisignano, demanding answers on the SSA's recent adoption of AI-driven customer service tools. The senators raised concerns about problems reminiscent of past missteps, including a failed fraud-detection chatbot that reportedly yielded only two potential fraud claims from 111,000 attempts and recent disruptions to benefit access linked to the agency's technology changes. "This lack of communication from your agency undermines its efforts to improve services by sowing chaos and confusion, which breeds distrust in the agency and its leadership," the senators said. The letter also requests details on the AI system implementations and their impact, setting a response deadline of July 18. Bisignano on Monday issued a response shared with Fox Business, defending the agency's reforms and recent track record. "The SSA is experiencing a customer service turnaround after four years of long wait times and record backlogs under the Biden administration," Bisignano said in the letter reviewed by Fox ahead of its release. "While I welcome your recent interest in customer service at SSA and the myriad of correspondences you sent my predecessor and me since President Trump's inauguration on January 20, 2025, I'm struck by how little you corresponded with the agency to express concern about deteriorating customer service during the previous administration," Bisignano wrote to Warren. The SSA provided updated performance data last month: The average response time for phone calls dropped to 6 minutes from 30 minutes in the prior fiscal year; field office wait times decreased to 23 minutes; and removal of online service downtimes has benefited an additional 125,000 users in a single week, according to the agency's findings. "Across all of our service indicators, the evidence is clear: better management is improving the customer experience on the phones, in the field offices, and online. Nothing in the data supports the irresponsible allegations of mismanagement and a customer service crisis at SSA," Bisignano said in his letter. But not everyone is certain those numbers reflect actual wait times for Social Security recipients. "A simple search reveals average wait times now exceed one hour, even though the SSA dashboard still shows 18.5 minutes," Kevin Thompson, CEO of 9i Capital Group and host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek. "Much of that data excludes the volume of callback requests—many people are opting for callbacks instead of waiting on hold, and those are coming 1.5 to 2 hours later, if at all." Changes at the SSA developed under the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), formerly led by Elon Musk. DOGE's initiatives, including substantial staff cuts, access to Social Security databases and shifting most services online have sparked bipartisan concern. Former SSA Commissioner Martin O'Malley warned that these measures could soon interrupt Social Security payments, a break from tradition in over 80 years of continuous benefit delivery. "Ultimately, you're going to see the system collapse and an interruption of benefits, within the next 30 to 90 days," O'Malley said in March. Newsweek reached out to Warren's office for comment via email. What People Are Saying Alex Beene, financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "With the current dispute on Social Security customer service wait times, it's more of a situation of "he said, she said." The recent news releases from the administration have focused on faster wait times and more cases being resolved. However, Senator Warren points to concerns her office has received over some of that data not being accurate, and Social Security field employees being highly stressed in maintaining the additional workload they've been asked to cover." Thompson also told Newsweek: "Like many of us, Warren wants to see accurate, honest data. We all support modernizing the program, but it's hard to reconcile claims of modernization with staff reductions and quiet efforts to push people into early retirement or resignation." What Happens Next Beneficiaries experiencing issues are urged to contact the SSA directly or reach out to congressional offices for assistance. Further updates are expected as lawmakers receive responses and new technology initiatives reach additional agency offices nationwide. "The suggestion of a meeting between legislators and the SSA could resolve some of these lingering questions over whether the new procedures to customer service are really decreasing wait times to the extent claimed or not," Beene said.
Newsweek
18 minutes ago
- Newsweek
U.S. Clean Tech Leadership at Risk Due to Trump Policies, Investors Warn
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Daniel Weiss is the co-founder and managing partner of Angeleno Group, a Los Angeles-based venture capital and growth equity investment firm founded in 2001 to seek out opportunities in what was then called "alternative energy." Not quite a quarter of a century later, solar and wind power have gone from alternative to mainstream. "The basic economics of clean energy have transformed in the last 20 years," Weiss told Newsweek. "A big part of the reason for that is that it's simply more cost effective." The combinations of solar or wind with battery storage have become the cheapest and fastest ways to add power capacity and they provided more than 90 percent of the new electricity sources added to the U.S. grid last year. The rest of the world is "stealing a march" on the U.S. by encouraging clean energy while the Trump administration turns away from renewable sources, veteran clean tech investor Rob Day said. The rest of the world is "stealing a march" on the U.S. by encouraging clean energy while the Trump administration turns away from renewable sources, veteran clean tech investor Rob Day said. Newsweek Illustration/Canva/Getty With the current surge in demand for power, market forces should be driving clean energy and climate-friendly technology companies to new heights. But the Trump administration's hostile posture toward renewable energy and climate policy has brought volatility and slower growth. Weiss said the best way to make sense of this moment is to "zoom in and zoom out. Zoom in to the past 8 months in the U.S. and you'll find a "steady drum beat of bad news" for the sector. "Investment has slowed in certain parts of the space," Weiss said. Zoom out to a global perspective long-term view, however, and a very different picture emerges. "One might even make the case that this is one of the most compelling moments to be deploying capital, at least since we founded our firm 20 plus years ago," Weiss said. Newsweek's Better Planet has been talking with clean tech investors about how they are navigating these extraordinary times for a series called "Climate Investing in a Volatile Climate." In this installment, we hear from two veteran investors in the sector, Weiss and Rob Day, co-founder and partner at Spring Lane Capital. Both pointed to the sharp contrast between current U.S. policy and economic reality, and both predicted that market forces will overcome ideology. President Donald Trump has eliminated most of his predecessor's supportive policies for clean energy, pulled the U.S. out of the global Paris Climate Agreement and is seeking to do away with the legal basis for regulating greenhouse gas emissions altogether. "It's a pretty rocky road ahead in the near term, and there's a lot of disruption," Weiss said. In May, former U.S. Treasury Secretary and Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen joined Angeleno Group's Board of Advisors to offer strategic guidance. Weiss said "global tailwinds are largely intact" for clean tech, with most other countries still committed to net-zero pledges. Late last month, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called on countries to make more ambitious climate goals to take advantage of a "new energy era" of cheap, clean power. "Nearly 80 percent of the world has sent a signal to capital markets, to investors that we're on a long-term trajectory moving from a low efficiency, high carbon world to a higher efficiency, low carbon world," he said. The "universe of investment possibility" in clean tech today is much greater, he said, even though valuation for some companies is lower. "So, deal flow is up, valuations are down," he said, a combination that recalls legendary investor Warren Buffett's advice to "be greedy only when others are fearful." The Clean Tech Hype Cycle On the opposite coast in a downtown Boston office, Spring Lane Capital co-founder Rob Day said he sees the sector going through a phase similar to that identified in the Gartner hype cycle. In that model, emerging technologies eventually reach a period of realistic but robust growth. But first, there is a peak of inflated expectations, followed by what's called a "trough of disillusionment," which is where some clean tech companies find themselves now, Day said. "I think for EVs in the U.S., in particular, we're in the trough of disillusionment right now," Day told Newsweek. Trump's "One Big Beautiful" bill passed by Congressional Republicans last month phases out tax credits for EVs, and the maker of the best-selling EV model, Tesla, suffered blowback due to its controversial CEO. But look beyond the headlines, Day said, and there are signs that EVs will soon pull out of the disillusionment trough. "If you look at the underlying market numbers, adoption has continued to grow," he said, as the lower total cost of ownership for EVs is still a compelling selling point. Day said a similar dynamic is playing out for other clean technologies as the gloomy headlines about the demise of supportive federal policy drive away some recent arrivers who jumped into a "frothy" market. The rate of growth has changed, he said, but clean tech is, by and large, still on a growth trajectory. Day's resume includes a consultant position at Bain & Company and a role with the World Resources Institute's Sustainable Enterprise Program, and his Cleantech Investing column was required reading for many people in the sector through the Bush and Obama years. Over that period, he has seen the sector adjust as federal subsidies and policy support waxed and waned. "We've learned how to operate within that kind of an environment before," Day said. His advice to investors in the sector: think more broadly about sustainability than just solar and wind—think about circular economy solutions, waste reduction and efficiency. Look to investment potential in states that have either supportive policies or basic needs for sustainability, such as a lack of landfill space or rising power demand. Also, he said, investors should look abroad. Just as Weiss pointed out the continued global support for climate action, Day said other countries are now taking greater advantage of the clean tech opportunities. "The rest of the world is just absolutely stealing a march on us, and the U.S. is absolutely going to lose its leadership position on all of these technologies and solutions of tomorrow," Day said. "And it's a crying shame."
