In December, the environmentalist activist group Greenpeace tried to circumvent United States law by appealing to a Dutch court to overturn the verdict of an American jury. Greenpeace was ordered to pay $667 million to Energy Transfer, a pipeline company, after the group tried to stop the Dakota Access Pipeline. A trial judge later reduced that amount to $345 million
At the time, The Washington Post reported that Greenpeace was hoping the Dutch court "would reassess the merits of the North Dakota case under Europe's sweeping anti-SLAPP directive." Greenpeace had reportedly supported and trained protesters, equipping them with lockboxes so they could chain themselves to the pipeline. Energy Transfer also said Greenpeace tried to "deprive the project of funding by falsely claiming the pipeline would encroach on tribal land."
Now a North Dakota judge has said he will order Greenpeace to pay the $345 million to Energy Transfer.
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
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.
In court papers filed Tuesday, Judge James Gion said he would sign an order requiring several Greenpeace entities to pay the judgment to pipeline company Energy Transfer. He set that amount at $345 million last year in a decision that reduced a jury’s damages by about half, but his latest filing didn’t specify a final amount.
The long-awaited order is expected to launch an appeal process in the North Dakota Supreme Court from both sides.
Last year, a nine-person jury found Netherlands-based Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA and funding arm Greenpeace Fund Inc. liable for defamation and other claims brought by Dallas-based Energy Transfer and subsidiary Dakota Access.
Recommended
Greenpeace said in a financial filing last year that it does not have the money to pay the $345 million, and that it would be unable to "continue normal operations if the judgment is enforced."That filing said the group had $1.4 million cash on hand and $23 million in assets as of December 31, 2024.
An attorney for Greenpeace, Marco Simons, told the AP, “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."
Greenpeace has also claimed that the lawsuit was meant to "silence activists and critics and chill First Amendment rights."
Energy Transfer said that's not true, and that the lawsuit was about Greenpeace not following the law.
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
This is what happens when you engage in activism that breaks the law.
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.”
— James (@RealJamesMJr) February 26, 2026
Wonder if anyone at Greenpeace ever thought about not exposing the company to $hundreds of millions…
No one at Greenpeace thought they'd be held accountable.
Protestors said they cared about environment but left behind hundreds of truckloads of garbage. pic.twitter.com/tSqbFUNGne
— John Kartch (@johnkartch) February 26, 2026
It's not really about the environment, of course.
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
Yes. This happened on Obama's watch.
Leftist activists have been taught that they are above the law, and that their activism is tolerated because they're on the "right side of history." But no one is above the law, and the activism that Greenpeace engaged in, encouraged, and supported is not protected by the First Amendment. Now they have to pay the price, which likely means the end of Greenpeace unless some Leftist billionaires bail them out.
Editor’s Note: The 2026 Midterms will determine the fate of President Trump’s America First agenda. Republicans must maintain control of both chambers of Congress.
Help Townhall continue to report on the Democrats’ radicalism and inform voters as our nation faces a crossroads. Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member