Op-Ed: The North Dakota Ruling Against Greenpeace Is a Threat to Free Speech
Madison Carter Greenpeace.org
France’s Greenpeace activists perform an action to support Greenpeace USA, next to Statue of Liberty at Pont de Grenelle in Paris on February 20, 2025. (photo: Thibaud Moritz/Getty)
Excerpts from the piece follows:
The verdict that threatens free speech
The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. It will have little meaning if multi-billion dollar corporations can sue peaceful protesters for unimaginable sums of money for their speech. Yet, that’s exactly what was decided in a small courtroom in Morton County, North Dakota.
Energy Transfer – a Dallas-based fossil fuel company that is responsible for the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) – sued two Greenpeace entities in the U.S. (Greenpeace Inc. and Greenpeace Fund), and Greenpeace International. Energy Transfer was awarded more than US$660 million in a highly watched, month-long case. Greenpeace will appeal the verdict.
…
The ruling in the Energy Transfer case could have wide ranging consequences on First Amendment rights in the U.S. By attempting to hold Greenpeace liable for everything that happened at Standing Rock, the case attempts to establish the idea that, for any participation in a protest, you can be held liable for the actions of other people, even if you’re not associated with them or if they’re never identified. It’s easy to see how this win for Energy Transfer could chill speech and silence future protests before they even begin.
…
Perhaps equally worrisome, this case is an attack on the type of ordinary advocacy that organizations like Greenpeace and the ACLU – alongside many others – rely on to do their work. Everyday actions like attending a protest, signing a letter of support, or supporting communities at risk should never be considered “unlawful.” Otherwise, the future of everyone’s First Amendment rights could be at risk.
If corporations can weaponize the court system to attack protesters and advocates for their speech, then any political speech or cause could become a target. And in an environment where the Trump administration is regularly leading dangerous attacks against our basic rights and liberties, including against the press and activists, this threat is all the more serious.
The right to protest and speak out must be embraced as a core pillar in a functioning democracy – even when that speech threatens the rich and powerful, and even when it’s speech we don’t agree with.
Read the full op-ed here.
