Nearly a decade after protests rocked construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, a North Dakota judge has signaled the next chapter in a legal battle that could reshape the future of one of the world’s most recognizable environmental groups.
Judge James Gion indicated this week that he will sign an order requiring multiple Greenpeace entities to pay $345 million in damages to pipeline operator Energy Transfer. The figure reflects a prior reduction from an original $667 million jury award. The case stems from Greenpeace’s involvement in protests aimed at halting the Dakota Access Pipeline project.
Greenpeace is cooked: “A North Dakota judge has said he will order Greenpeace to pay damages expected to total $345 million in connection with protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline from nearly a decade ago, a figure the environmental group contends it cannot pay.” pic.twitter.com/BC0SqO72Gp
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) February 25, 2026
Last year, a nine-person jury found Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, and Greenpeace Fund Inc. liable for defamation and other claims brought by Dallas-based Energy Transfer and its subsidiary Dakota Access. The lawsuit alleged that Greenpeace supported and trained protesters, including equipping individuals with lockboxes that allowed them to chain themselves to construction equipment and infrastructure. Energy Transfer also claimed the group attempted to undermine project financing by falsely asserting that the pipeline encroached on tribal lands.
Following the verdict, Greenpeace sought relief outside the United States, appealing to a Dutch court in an effort to have the case reassessed under Europe’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) directive. According to reporting at the time, Greenpeace hoped European legal standards would provide a more favorable review of the North Dakota decision. That effort did not prevent the North Dakota court from moving forward with enforcement of the reduced judgment.
Then take their assets and shut them down. Maybe even bring back debtor’s prisons. They’ve earned it.
— Okham Man (@OckhamMan) February 25, 2026
In court filings, Judge Gion confirmed he would enter the order requiring payment, a move expected to trigger appeals from both sides to the North Dakota Supreme Court.
Greenpeace has maintained that it does not have the financial resources to satisfy the judgment. In a 2024 financial filing, the organization reported $1.4 million in cash on hand and approximately $23 million in total assets as of December 31, 2024. The group stated it would be unable to “continue normal operations if the judgment is enforced.”
Greenpeace’s attorney was quoted saying “As mid-sized nonprofits, it has always been clear that we would not have the ability to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.”
Wonder if anyone at Greenpeace ever thought about not exposing the company to $hundreds of millions…
— James (@RealJamesMJr) February 26, 2026
Marco Simons, an attorney representing Greenpeace, told the Associated Press that it had always been clear the organization lacked the ability to pay damages on that scale. Greenpeace has also characterized the lawsuit as an attempt to silence activism and chill First Amendment protections.
Energy Transfer disputes that framing, asserting that the litigation concerns unlawful conduct rather than protected speech.
Aside from the inexcusable actions of environmental protesters, there’s no question the Obama White House also enabled this by refusing to actually crackdown on the violence. https://t.co/t7UR6oxQXf
— Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) February 25, 2026
The case now moves toward what is likely to be a high-stakes appellate fight. With hundreds of millions of dollars hanging in the balance, the outcome could have lasting implications not only for Greenpeace, but for the broader intersection of protest activity, corporate liability claims, and the limits of advocacy under U.S. law.
