'Existential' Greenpeace verdict will chill climate protests

A pipeline company's victory in court over Greenpeace, and the huge damages it now faces, will encourage other oil and gas companies to pursue environmental protesters at a time when Donald Trump's energy agenda is in ascendancy, experts have warned.

- By Rachel Leingang

On 19 March a North Dakota jury ruled that three Greenpeace entities must pay Energy Transfer, which was co-founded by a prominent Trump donor, more than $660m. The jury decided the organisations were liable for defamation and other claims after a five-week trial in Mandan, near where the Dakota Access pipeline protests occurred in 2016 and 2017.

"This verdict will embolden other energy companies to take legal action against protesters who physically block their projects," said Michael Gerrard, the founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School. "It will chill those kinds of protests; whether the chilling goes beyond that remains to be seen. It won't inhibit litigation against fossil fuel projects; we will surely see more of those as the Trump administration advances its 'drill, baby, drill' agenda."

Kevin Cramer, the US senator from North Dakota, cheered the judgment against Greenpeace over the pipeline protests in his state, congratulating the energy company that sued the environmental group for its big win. Justice was served, he said.