SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Krystal Two Bulls and other defendants celebrated on Thursday after a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit targeting water protectors who organized against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). (Photo: EarthRights International/Twitter)
Blow to 'Powerful Corporate Interests' as Federal Court Throws Out Pipeline Company Lawsuit Against DAPL Water Protectors
Greenpeace lawyer confident that decision will deter other companies "from abusing the legal system in their quest to bully those who speak truth to power."
Feb 14, 2019
In a "landmark" ruling on Thursday, a federal court in North Dakota tossed out a "baseless" case against Greenpeace and other environmental and Indigenous activists who organized protests against the deeply controversial Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), which drew thousands of people to the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in 2016.
"This is what happens when greedy corporations go after Indigenous women grounded in the power of prayer, the power of relationship building, and the power of collective organizing."
--Krystal Two Bulls, defendant
District Judge Billy Roy Wilson dismissed (pdf) all claims against all defendants in a lawsuit brought by fossil fuel giant Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), which sought to hold the water protectors liable under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act for millions of dollars in alleged damages.
"Donating to people whose cause you support does not create a RICO enterprise," Wilson wrote in his opinion. "Posting articles written by people with similar beliefs does not create a RICO enterprise."
While the protests against DAPL, which were met with a militarized response from law enforcement, were ultimately unsuccessful--and the now-operational pipeline already boasts an alarming track record of oil spills--the activists and their attorneys welcomed the win in court on Friday, noting that Wilson's ruling aligns with that of a similar case that was dismissed in 2017.
"We are confident that this decision will set a precedent that deters Energy Transfer and other corporations from abusing the legal system in their quest to bully those who speak truth to power," declared Greenpeace USA general counsel Tom Wetterer. "This is a huge victory not just for Greenpeace but for anyone and everyone who has ever stood up against powerful corporate interests."
Wetterer posited that the dismissal of ETP's "baseless lawsuit against Greenpeace and others sends a clear message to companies trying to muzzle civil society that corporate overreach will not be tolerated. It is also a check on corporate efforts to silence dissent."
"We are confident that this decision will set a precedent that deters Energy Transfer and other corporations from abusing the legal system in their quest to bully those who speak truth to power."
--Tom Wetterer, Greenpeace USA
Defense attorneys called the case a "textbook example" of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).
"The goal of a SLAPP is not to win, but to burden the defendants with costly and time-intensive litigation procedures, while creating a chilling effect that discourages others from speaking out on issues of public concern," EarthRights International explained in a statement on Friday. "The judge's swift dismissal suggests that the federal judiciary may be losing patience with these abusive tactics."
Denouncing ETP's "embarrassing and expensive attempt to silence organizers who stand for justice," Astha Sharma Pokharel, a legal fellow at the Center for Constitutional Rights, charged that the "baseless lawsuit should never have been filed, but [this] victory will only strengthen the movements they tried so hard to suppress."
Celebrating the win, defendant Krystal Two Bulls concluded: "Loss. Defeat. Dismissal. This is what happens when greedy corporations go after Indigenous women grounded in the power of prayer, the power of relationship building, and the power of collective organizing. Not only was my right to free speech upheld by this decision, but also my rights as an Indigenous woman to steward this land. Now, more than ever, we ALL need our rights to share our voices uplifted, supported, and protected."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
center for constitutional rightsdakota access pipelineearthrights internationalfossil fuelsgreenpeaceindigenousnorth dakota
In a "landmark" ruling on Thursday, a federal court in North Dakota tossed out a "baseless" case against Greenpeace and other environmental and Indigenous activists who organized protests against the deeply controversial Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), which drew thousands of people to the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in 2016.
"This is what happens when greedy corporations go after Indigenous women grounded in the power of prayer, the power of relationship building, and the power of collective organizing."
--Krystal Two Bulls, defendant
District Judge Billy Roy Wilson dismissed (pdf) all claims against all defendants in a lawsuit brought by fossil fuel giant Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), which sought to hold the water protectors liable under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act for millions of dollars in alleged damages.
"Donating to people whose cause you support does not create a RICO enterprise," Wilson wrote in his opinion. "Posting articles written by people with similar beliefs does not create a RICO enterprise."
While the protests against DAPL, which were met with a militarized response from law enforcement, were ultimately unsuccessful--and the now-operational pipeline already boasts an alarming track record of oil spills--the activists and their attorneys welcomed the win in court on Friday, noting that Wilson's ruling aligns with that of a similar case that was dismissed in 2017.
"We are confident that this decision will set a precedent that deters Energy Transfer and other corporations from abusing the legal system in their quest to bully those who speak truth to power," declared Greenpeace USA general counsel Tom Wetterer. "This is a huge victory not just for Greenpeace but for anyone and everyone who has ever stood up against powerful corporate interests."
Wetterer posited that the dismissal of ETP's "baseless lawsuit against Greenpeace and others sends a clear message to companies trying to muzzle civil society that corporate overreach will not be tolerated. It is also a check on corporate efforts to silence dissent."
"We are confident that this decision will set a precedent that deters Energy Transfer and other corporations from abusing the legal system in their quest to bully those who speak truth to power."
--Tom Wetterer, Greenpeace USA
Defense attorneys called the case a "textbook example" of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).
"The goal of a SLAPP is not to win, but to burden the defendants with costly and time-intensive litigation procedures, while creating a chilling effect that discourages others from speaking out on issues of public concern," EarthRights International explained in a statement on Friday. "The judge's swift dismissal suggests that the federal judiciary may be losing patience with these abusive tactics."
Denouncing ETP's "embarrassing and expensive attempt to silence organizers who stand for justice," Astha Sharma Pokharel, a legal fellow at the Center for Constitutional Rights, charged that the "baseless lawsuit should never have been filed, but [this] victory will only strengthen the movements they tried so hard to suppress."
Celebrating the win, defendant Krystal Two Bulls concluded: "Loss. Defeat. Dismissal. This is what happens when greedy corporations go after Indigenous women grounded in the power of prayer, the power of relationship building, and the power of collective organizing. Not only was my right to free speech upheld by this decision, but also my rights as an Indigenous woman to steward this land. Now, more than ever, we ALL need our rights to share our voices uplifted, supported, and protected."
In a "landmark" ruling on Thursday, a federal court in North Dakota tossed out a "baseless" case against Greenpeace and other environmental and Indigenous activists who organized protests against the deeply controversial Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), which drew thousands of people to the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in 2016.
"This is what happens when greedy corporations go after Indigenous women grounded in the power of prayer, the power of relationship building, and the power of collective organizing."
--Krystal Two Bulls, defendant
District Judge Billy Roy Wilson dismissed (pdf) all claims against all defendants in a lawsuit brought by fossil fuel giant Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), which sought to hold the water protectors liable under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act for millions of dollars in alleged damages.
"Donating to people whose cause you support does not create a RICO enterprise," Wilson wrote in his opinion. "Posting articles written by people with similar beliefs does not create a RICO enterprise."
While the protests against DAPL, which were met with a militarized response from law enforcement, were ultimately unsuccessful--and the now-operational pipeline already boasts an alarming track record of oil spills--the activists and their attorneys welcomed the win in court on Friday, noting that Wilson's ruling aligns with that of a similar case that was dismissed in 2017.
"We are confident that this decision will set a precedent that deters Energy Transfer and other corporations from abusing the legal system in their quest to bully those who speak truth to power," declared Greenpeace USA general counsel Tom Wetterer. "This is a huge victory not just for Greenpeace but for anyone and everyone who has ever stood up against powerful corporate interests."
Wetterer posited that the dismissal of ETP's "baseless lawsuit against Greenpeace and others sends a clear message to companies trying to muzzle civil society that corporate overreach will not be tolerated. It is also a check on corporate efforts to silence dissent."
"We are confident that this decision will set a precedent that deters Energy Transfer and other corporations from abusing the legal system in their quest to bully those who speak truth to power."
--Tom Wetterer, Greenpeace USA
Defense attorneys called the case a "textbook example" of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).
"The goal of a SLAPP is not to win, but to burden the defendants with costly and time-intensive litigation procedures, while creating a chilling effect that discourages others from speaking out on issues of public concern," EarthRights International explained in a statement on Friday. "The judge's swift dismissal suggests that the federal judiciary may be losing patience with these abusive tactics."
Denouncing ETP's "embarrassing and expensive attempt to silence organizers who stand for justice," Astha Sharma Pokharel, a legal fellow at the Center for Constitutional Rights, charged that the "baseless lawsuit should never have been filed, but [this] victory will only strengthen the movements they tried so hard to suppress."
Celebrating the win, defendant Krystal Two Bulls concluded: "Loss. Defeat. Dismissal. This is what happens when greedy corporations go after Indigenous women grounded in the power of prayer, the power of relationship building, and the power of collective organizing. Not only was my right to free speech upheld by this decision, but also my rights as an Indigenous woman to steward this land. Now, more than ever, we ALL need our rights to share our voices uplifted, supported, and protected."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.