Greenpeace trial begins over North Dakota pipeline protests. Why the case will test the 1st Amendment

Energy Transfer, a Texas pipeline company, is suing Greenpeace for allegedly orchestrating delays and defamation during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests. The company claims hundreds of millions of dollars in damages due to disruptions and reputational harm. Greenpeace denies these allegations, emphasizing the Indigenous-led nature of the protests and their own commitment to non-violence. The lawsuit targets Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA, and their funding arm. Energy Transfer alleges trespass, nuisance, and defamation, citing a letter sent to their lenders. Greenpeace counters that the letter was an act of free speech signed by numerous organizations. The core of the dispute involves statements about the pipeline's impact on sacred sites. Energy Transfer claims significant financial losses due to delays and reputational damage caused by Greenpeace's actions. Greenpeace disputes these claims, questioning the calculation of damages and the lack of expert testimony supporting Energy Transfer's case. A jury trial is underway to determine the outcome of this high-stakes legal battle.