United States of America

Greenpeace Ordered to Pay Expected $345M Over Pipeline Protests

Did Greenpeace organize a criminal campaign against the Dakota Access Pipeline protest or were Greenpeace's actions peaceful dissent being silenced by corporate lawsuits?

Published FEB 26

Greenpeace Ordered to Pay Expected $345M Over Pipeline Protests

Story

Above: A protest against the Dakota Access Pipeline in Washington, D.C., U.S., on March 10, 2017. Image credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images

The Facts

A district judge in North Dakota has stated that he will order the environmental activist group Greenpeace to pay an expected $345 million to Energy Transfer due to its role in the Dakota Access Pipeline protests.
The Washington Times
guardian
Energy Transfer initiated legal proceedings against Greenpeace in March 2019, claiming the organization orchestrated an "unlawful and violent scheme" aimed at damaging the company's finances, reputation and employees, as well as obstructing the construction of the pipeline due to its "extremist agenda."
The Climate Litigation Database
In March 2025, a North Dakota jury found Greenpeace Inc. liable on all counts, including trespass, conspiracy and nuisance, while Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund Inc. were found liable for tortious interference and defamation.
The Climate Litigation Database
The jury subsequently ordered the three Greenpeace entities to pay nearly $667 million in damages to Energy Transfer and Dakota Access. Judge James Gion, however, later reduced that amount to roughly $345 million in October 2025, after disallowing several claims for a lack of evidence and duplication.
The Climate Litigation Database
The Climate Litigation Database
In a memorandum filed on Tuesday, the judge defended the revised figure, denying a motion by Greenpeace to reduce its liabilities since there was "sufficient evidence" to support the jury's verdict and therefore "no reason to change the Court's decision." The filing, however, did not indicate the final amount to be paid.
Greenpeace International
guardian
Energy Transfer has previously stated that it would appeal the reduced damages, calling the original jury's findings "lawful and just." Greenpeace, meanwhile, plans to seek a new trial and will appeal if denied by the courts.
PBS News
Greenpeace International

Sources Split

LEFT

CENTER

RIGHT

ESTAB
CRIT

CENTER

PRO
ESTAB

The Spin

Climate-skeptic narrative

During the Dakota Access Pipeline protests, Greenpeace orchestrated a deplorable campaign against Energy Transfer that involved violent attacks on staff and equipment, trespassing on private property and defamatory propaganda. This disorder wasn't a peaceful protest but criminal mayhem designed to inflict maximum financial damage on a lawfully permitted project.

The Climate Litigation Database

Climate activist narrative

Energy Transfer's meritless lawsuit is a blatant attempt to weaponize the courts into silencing environmental advocacy and dissent. In doing so, the company poses a direct threat to free speech by holding peaceful protestors responsible for the actions of others, setting a dangerous precedent that undermines the fundamental right to protest corporate harm.

Greenpeace International