Greenpeace Tactics Under Fire in Dakota Access Pipeline Case

Two former Greenpeace employees recently testified they were unaware of the organization’s alleged role in obstructing the Dakota Access Pipeline, a project that faced significant delays and disruptions at the hands of environmental activists, reported Legal Newsline.

The case, in which Energy Transfer is seeking $300 million in damages, highlights concerns about radical activism targeting vital energy infrastructure.

Energy Transfer alleges that Greenpeace and other groups engaged in deliberate efforts to halt pipeline construction, using misinformation and obstruction tactics that caused extensive financial damage. The company argues these actions amounted to racketeering, accusing Greenpeace of spreading false claims about environmental risks to generate public outrage and fundraising support.

The former Greenpeace employees claimed they focused only on communications and public outreach, denying involvement in the disruptive tactics seen during the protests.

The Dakota Access Pipeline faced intense opposition throughout 2016 and 2017, particularly near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. While protests were widely reported as peaceful, some activists engaged in vandalism, physical blockades, and hostile confrontations with law enforcement, raising concerns about public safety and property damage.

Energy Transfer contends that Greenpeace played a major role in promoting the false narrative that the pipeline posed serious environmental dangers. Greenpeace insists its advocacy was protected under free speech rights and denies engaging in illegal conduct.

This high-stakes legal battle could establish critical boundaries for activist groups that intentionally obstruct legitimate business operations. As America continues to navigate energy security challenges, the case underscores the dangers of politically motivated disruption aimed at sabotaging infrastructure projects that fuel the nation’s economy.