Energy Transfer v Greenpeace (Dakota Access)
Energy Transfer sued Greenpeace entities over protests against the Dakota Access pipeline. A North Dakota jury awarded about $666.9 million in March 2025, the judge cut the award to about $345 million, and Greenpeace International sued Energy Transfer in Amsterdam under the EU anti-SLAPP directive.
Jury verdict of 19 March 2025; judgment of about $345 million plus 11% interest from 19 March 2025 entered 27 February 2026. Greenpeace is seeking a new trial and plans an appeal.
Status As of October 2026: final judgment of $345m plus 11% interest was entered in February 2026; Greenpeace was seeking a new trial and planned an appeal, and the Dutch anti-SLAPP case had survived an interim ruling in June 2026.
- Energy Transfer — Judgment of about $345 million plus 11% interest from 19 March 2025 against the Greenpeace entities, with a new trial and appeal sought. News From The States
- Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace Fund — Ordered to pay about $345 million plus interest; Greenpeace said the judgment could force bankruptcy in the US.
- People arrested at Standing Rock — 761 to 854 arrests; of 836 state cases, 392 were dismissed and 26 ended in conviction at trial. HPR (hpr1.com)
What happened
Energy Transfer (ET) brought two lawsuits against Greenpeace entities in connection with protests against the Dakota Access pipeline. The first, filed on 22 August 2017 in the US District Court for North Dakota, claimed $900 million under the federal racketeering law (RICO) and other heads against Greenpeace International, Greenpeace Inc., Greenpeace Fund, BankTrack and Earth First!. BankTrack was dismissed in July 2018, and all claims were dismissed in February 2019.
The second suit was heard in North Dakota state court in Morton County. On 19 March 2025 a jury returned a verdict of about $666.9 million against Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace Fund. On 29 October 2025 Judge James Gion cut the award to about $345 million, finding some damages duplicative, without legal basis, or above the statutory caps on punitive damages. Final judgment was entered on 27 February 2026: $345 million plus 11% interest running from 19 March 2025. The claims in the state suit are reported as defamation and conspiracy.
ET called the judgment an important step in holding Greenpeace accountable. Greenpeace said it was seeking a new trial and then planned to appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court, and said the judgment could force bankruptcy in the US. Greenpeace International also filed a counter-suit in the Amsterdam District Court under Dutch law and the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive, seeking damages and costs.
On 7 May 2026 the North Dakota Supreme Court granted a 'narrowly tailored' anti-suit injunction that, in the words reproduced by Greenpeace, does not "foreclose all related litigation by GPI in the Netherlands". About 3 June 2026 the Amsterdam court rejected ET's jurisdiction and stay pleas, gave ET six weeks to file a defence on the merits and ordered it to pay €1,495 in costs, according to Greenpeace and its lawyers.
Separately, arrests during the Standing Rock protests were counted at 761 by the Morton County Sheriff and 854 by the Water Protector Legal Collective. Leaked documents of the security firm TigerSwan, published by The Intercept in 2017, described the movement as an insurgency.
- 201722 Aug: Energy Transfer files $900m federal suit (RICO and other heads) against Greenpeace International, Greenpeace Inc., Greenpeace Fund, BankTrack and Earth First!; The Intercept publishes leaked TigerSwan documents (27 May)
- 2018BankTrack dismissed (July); 30 May: North Dakota court dismisses the state security board's suit against TigerSwan
- 2019February: all claims in the federal suit dismissed
- 202519 Mar: jury verdict of about $666.9m in Morton County; 29 Oct: Judge Gion cuts the award to about $345m
- 202627 Feb: final judgment of $345m plus 11% interest; 16 Apr: first Amsterdam hearing; 7 May: North Dakota Supreme Court issues a narrow anti-suit injunction; about 3 Jun: Amsterdam court rejects ET's jurisdiction and stay pleas
What was said
“dangerously broad”
“Posting articles written by people with similar beliefs does not create a RICO enterprise.”
“important step in this legal process of holding Greenpeace accountable”
“narrowly tailored”
“an ideologically driven insurgency with a strong religious component”
“followed the jihadist insurgency model”
“foreclose all related litigation by GPI in the Netherlands”
Where accounts differ
Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.
Called the judgment an important step in holding Greenpeace accountable.
Filed an anti-SLAPP case in Amsterdam under Dutch law and the EU directive and said the judgment could force bankruptcy in the US.
Prakken d'Oliveira (Greenpeace International's lawyers)Dismissed the first suit in February 2019: 'Posting articles written by people with similar beliefs does not create a RICO enterprise.'
Courthouse NewsCut the jury award from about $666.9m to about $345m as partly duplicative, without legal basis or above statutory caps.
PBS NewsHour (AP)In an interim ruling about 3 June 2026 rejected ET's jurisdiction and stay pleas, per Greenpeace and its lawyers.
Prakken d'Oliveira (Greenpeace International's lawyers)854 arrests; final tally of 836 state cases plus 5 federal prosecutions.
HPR (hpr1.com)Granted a "narrowly tailored" anti-suit injunction: Greenpeace International is barred only from seeking a finding that the North Dakota case lacks "legal foundation" or is "manifestly unfounded"; it does not "foreclose all related litigation by GPI in the Netherlands".
Greenpeace InternationalPursues damages and costs in Amsterdam under Dutch law and the EU anti-SLAPP Directive.
Inside Climate NewsHow it looked
Shown
- The Dutch case presented as an anti-SLAPP action against Energy TransferGreenpeace International and its lawyers Prakken d'Oliveira · Prakken d'Oliveira (Greenpeace International's lawyers)
Recorded
- First suit: filed 22 August 2017 in the US District Court for North Dakota; $900m claimed under RICO and other heads; defendants Greenpeace International, Greenpeace Inc., Greenpeace Fund, BankTrack and Earth First!; BankTrack dismissed July 2018; all claims dismissed February 2019.
- Second suit (Morton County, North Dakota): jury verdict of about $666.9m on 19 March 2025 against Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace Fund; some outlets reported about $660m or $670m.
- On 29 October 2025 Judge James Gion cut the award to about $345m, finding some damages duplicative, without legal basis or above statutory caps on punitive damages.
- Final judgment entered 27 February 2026: $345m plus 11% interest from 19 March 2025.
- Greenpeace International filed in the Amsterdam District Court under Dutch law and the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive; first hearing 16 April 2026; on 7 May 2026 the North Dakota Supreme Court granted a narrow anti-suit injunction barring Greenpeace International only from seeking a finding that the North Dakota case lacks legal foundation or is manifestly unfounded.
- About 3 June 2026 the Amsterdam court rejected ET's jurisdiction and stay pleas, gave ET six weeks to file a defence and ordered it to pay €1,495 in costs.
- Standing Rock arrests: 761 per the Morton County Sheriff and 854 per the Water Protector Legal Collective. The Collective's final tally of 836 state cases: 392 dismissed, 42 acquitted, 188 pretrial diversion (185 in one report), 146 plea deals, 26 convicted at trial, 45 inactive or outstanding warrants; plus 5 federal prosecutions, 841 cases in total.
- North Dakota's Private Investigative and Security Board sued TigerSwan over unlicensed operation; Judge Grinsteiner dismissed the case on 30 May 2018, sending fines to the administrative process.
- E&E News reported in July 2024 on a settlement proposal within Greenpeace and the board's rejection of it.
- A tribal member quoted by States Newsroom after the verdict said Standing Rock had not been heard.
- The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre's 2015–2024 analysis lists the Dakota Access Pipeline among the projects with the most attacks on defenders; Energy Transfer was among 32 companies invited to respond; no per-company counts are published.
Who gained
Reached nature or the ground
Gained elsewhere
Responses on record
- energy-transfer (After the judgment): Called the judgment an 'important step in this legal process of holding Greenpeace accountable'.
- greenpeace-international (2026): Said it was seeking a new trial and then planned to appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court, and that the judgment could force bankruptcy in the US.
- greenpeace-international (2026): Filed in the Amsterdam District Court under Dutch law and the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive, seeking damages and costs. · Prakken d'Oliveira (Greenpeace International's lawyers)
In court and with insurers
Lawsuits and rulings
- 2017-08-22–2019-02Dismissed$900m USD million, claimedEnergy Transfer v. Greenpeace International et al. (federal RICO suit)US District Court, North Dakota · Civil · Energy Transfer → Greenpeace International, Greenpeace Inc., Greenpeace Fund, BankTrack, Earth First!
RICO and other heads; BankTrack dismissed July 2018; all claims dismissed February 2019. Courthouse News
- 2026-02-27Claimant won$345m USD million, about, plus 11% interest from 19 March 2025Energy Transfer v. Greenpeace (Morton County state suit)North Dakota state court, Morton County · Civil · Energy Transfer → Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace Fund
Jury verdict of about $666.9m on 19 March 2025; cut to about $345m on 29 October 2025; final judgment 27 February 2026. Greenpeace was seeking a new trial and then an appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court. News From The States
- OngoingGreenpeace International v. Energy Transfer (anti-SLAPP)Amsterdam District Court · Civil · Greenpeace International → Energy Transfer
Filed under Dutch law and the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive, seeking damages and costs. The North Dakota Supreme Court granted a narrow anti-suit injunction on 7 May 2026. About 3 June 2026 the Amsterdam court rejected ET's jurisdiction and stay pleas and gave ET six weeks to file a defence. Prakken d'Oliveira (Greenpeace International's lawyers)
- 2018-05-30DismissedNorth Dakota Private Investigative and Security Board v. TigerSwanNorth Dakota district court · Administrative · North Dakota Private Investigative and Security Board → TigerSwan
Suit over unlicensed operation; Judge Grinsteiner dismissed it, sending fines to the administrative process. The appeal outcome was not found.
Insurers
What nature saw
Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.
What we don't know
Nature
- Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.
Accounts
Record
- Unclear Whether ET filed its defence in the Amsterdam case and the later hearings: not found.
- None on record The outcome of a new-trial motion and of any North Dakota Supreme Court appeal filing after June 2026: not found.
- None on record The appeal outcome in the state security board's case against TigerSwan: not found.
- Disputed The jury figure is reported differently: about $666.9m, with some outlets giving about $660m or $670m.
- Disputed Arrest counts conflict: 761 (Morton County Sheriff) against 854 (Water Protector Legal Collective); one report counts 185 pretrial diversions where another counts 188.
- Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: the sources reviewed say Greenpeace's US office cut about 20% of its staff after the verdict.
- Disputed Reports round the jury award differently: about $666.9 million in one account and about $667 million in another.
Did the harm stop?
the sources reviewed describes the Dakota Access dispute through the litigation and arrests only; it records no environmental measurement of the pipeline.
Who paid?
Under the February 2026 judgment, Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace Fund owe about $345 million plus 11% interest from 19 March 2025; Greenpeace said the judgment could force bankruptcy in the US.
Sources
Press and investigations
- Judge tosses $900M suit over Greenpeace pipeline protestsCourthouse News · 2019-02
- Judge orders Greenpeace to pay $345 million in pipeline lawsuit, cutting jury amount nearly in halfPBS NewsHour (AP) · 2025-10-29
- Judge finalizes order for Greenpeace to pay $345 million in North Dakota oil pipeline caseNews From The States · 2026-02
- Greenpeace's Dutch Anti-SLAPP Case Against Oil Pipeline Giant AdvancesInside Climate News · 2026-06-21
- Judge approves $345 million verdict against Greenpeace in pipeline suitAP via Hawaii Tribune-Herald · 2026-02-28
- Jury finds Greenpeace at fault for protest damagesFlorida Phoenix (States Newsroom) · 2025-03-21
- More than two years later, last NoDAPL trials finishHPR (hpr1.com) ·
- Inside a leadership 'implosion' at GreenpeaceE&E News · 2024-07-01
- Judge says Greenpeace must pay $345 million in pipeline lawsuit, cutting jury amount nearly in halfAP via ClickOnDetroit · 2025-10-29
Communities and civil society
- Greenpeace International press release on the North Dakota Supreme Court order of 7 May 2026 (court quotes as reproduced by Greenpeace)Greenpeace International · 2026-05
- Greenpeace International wins preliminary phase of anti-SLAPP case vs Energy TransferPrakken d'Oliveira (Greenpeace International's lawyers) · 2026-06
Connected cases
- Standing Rock / Dakota Access: arrests, TigerSwan and the Greenpeace damages award United States · 2025 Related matter
- Energy Transfer (Company) — here: Plaintiff in both suits against Greenpeace entities; there: Pipeline developer; claimant in the damages suit
- Greenpeace USA (NGO) — here: Defendant in the North Dakota state suit; there: Defendant in the damages suit (with Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund)
- TigerSwan (Company) — here: Private security firm at Standing Rock whose documents were leaked; there: Private security contractor
- Morton County Sheriff (Public authority) — here: Counted 761 arrests at Standing Rock; there: Law enforcement; counted 761 arrests
- Water Protector Legal Collective (NGO) — here: Counted 854 arrests and tallied 836 state cases; there: Legal collective that tallied the arrests
- BankTrack (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit until its dismissal in July 2018; there: Defendant in the first suit, dismissed
- Corporate suits against Greenpeace (TotalEnergies, Shell, Resolute) France, United Kingdom, United States · 2019–2024 Related matter
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Defendant in all three suits
- Resolute Forest Products v Greenpeace Canada · 2012–2024 Related matter
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Defendant in the US case; campaigner
- TotalEnergies v Greenpeace France France · 2022–2024 Related matter
- Alliance to End Plastic Waste and Renew Oceans (Ganges) India · 2019–2026
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Its Unearthed unit published the 2024 comparison
- Brent Spar decommissioning controversy (North Sea) United Kingdom · 1995–2019
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Campaigner in the Brent Spar controversy
- Coca-Cola plastic pledges and brand audits United States · 2018
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Analyst of the alliance's results
- EDF spying on Greenpeace (France) France · 2011–2013
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Organisation placed under surveillance; awarded damages at first instance
- EU bans three neonicotinoid pesticides outdoors in 2018; Turkey follows in part European Union · 2018
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: campaigner and reporter on exports
- EU seal-product ban's Inuit exemption found ineffective Canada · 2014
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Campaigner; apology issuer (unverified)
- Greenpeace ends all engagement with APP and Sinar Mas over deforestation links Indonesia · 2018
- Greenpeace International (NGO) — here: Defendant in the North Dakota suits; claimant in the Amsterdam anti-SLAPP case; there: ended engagement with APP and Sinar Mas
- Greenpeace ends all engagement with APP Sinar Mas over deforestation Indonesia · 2013–2018
- Greenpeace International (NGO) — here: Defendant in the North Dakota suits; claimant in the Amsterdam anti-SLAPP case; there: NGO that ended engagement with the company
- Greenpeace leaves the Forest Stewardship Council in 2018 Global · 2018
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Organisation that ended its FSC membership
- Greenpeace says fisheries scientist Ray Hilborn got $3.56m from seafood groups United States · 2003–2016
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: complainant; reported the funding figures
- Hess agreed to buy at least US$750 million of Guyana forest credits Guyana · 2011–2032
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Campaign group that criticised the plan
- Indonesia's forest moratorium: ministry cited 38% less clearing, Greenpeace disputed it Indonesia · 2011–2019
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: critic; published satellite analysis
- McKinsey advice to COP28 presidency and fossil clients United Arab Emirates · 2011–2025
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Author of the 2011 report on McKinsey's cost curves
- Plastic waste imports into Türkiye (Adana) Türkiye · 2016–2026
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Reported UK plastic at Adana dumping sites (2021)
- Raja Ampat nickel licences revoked Indonesia · 2025
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Campaign organisation; reported more than 500 hectares destroyed
- Russia declares WWF and Greenpeace 'undesirable' organisations Russia · 2023
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Declared undesirable and closed in Russia
- Russia labels WWF Russia a foreign agent, then an undesirable organisation Russia · 2023
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Declared undesirable on 19 May 2023
- Shell and Greenpeace settle Penguins FPSO case; Greenpeace pays RNLI £300,000 United Kingdom · 2023–2024
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Defendant; paid the RNLI and accepted exclusion zones
- Turmeric, neem, basmati, Nap Hal patent revocations India · 2004–2022
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: Declared victory on the Nap Hal wheat revocation
- UK packaging recycling notes (PRN) system and export fraud United Kingdom · 2009–2025
- Greenpeace (NGO) — here: Defendant in the federal suit; there: NGO; found UK plastic at sites in Adana