A North Dakota jury found Greenpeace liable for defamation and other claims related to their protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline. The jury awarded substantial damages to Energy Transfer and Dakota Access. Greenpeace senior legal adviser indicated plans to appeal, reinforcing their commitment to activism. Energy Transfer viewed the verdict as a victory for local residents affected by protest actions. This case highlights the ongoing tensions between environmental activism and corporate interests, specifically regarding the complex legal boundaries of free speech and protest.
The jury found Greenpeace liable for defamation in a case initiated by Energy Transfer, stemming from protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline.
Greenpeace plans to appeal the jury’s decision, emphasizing their ongoing commitment to fight and activism against the Dakota Access pipeline.
Energy Transfer characterized the verdict as a victory not only for the company but also for the residents of Mandan, who faced disruption from protests.
The ruling affirms the distinction between free speech and unlawful activities, as stated by Energy Transfer, underlining the legal implications of Greenpeace's actions.
Collection
[
|
...
]