The $667 million verdict against Greenpeace in North Dakota is seen as a potentially flawed attack on climate activism and free speech. Observers noted that the trial, shrouded in secrecy and lacking a court reporter, failed to provide Greenpeace with a fair hearing. Despite the ruling, there's optimism among legal advocates that it may be overturned on appeal. There are ongoing proceedings in Europe that could compensate Greenpeace and challenge the legitimacy of the U.S. verdict as a SLAPP lawsuit aimed at silencing dissent.
The stunning $667m verdict against Greenpeace is a direct attack on the climate movement, Indigenous peoples, and the first amendment.
Greenpeace lost, not because it did something wrong, but because it was denied a fair trial.
This is precisely why many of us on the monitoring team believe there is a good chance Greenpeace will not pay the first dollar of the judgment.
Many legal observers and first amendment scholars regard the North Dakota case as a SLAPP harassment lawsuit.
Collection
[
|
...
]