SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_2_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}#sSHARED_-_Social_Desktop_0_0_11_0_0_1.row-wrapper{margin:40px auto;}#sBoost_post_0_0_0_0_0_0_1_0{background-color:#000;color:#fff;}.boost-post{--article-direction:column;--min-height:none;--height:auto;--padding:24px;--titles-width:calc(100% - 84px);--image-fit:cover;--image-pos:right;--photo-caption-size:12px;--photo-caption-space:20px;--headline-size:23px;--headline-space:18px;--subheadline-size:13px;--text-size:12px;--oswald-font:"Oswald", Impact, "Franklin Gothic Bold", sans-serif;--cta-position:center;overflow:hidden;margin-bottom:0;--lora-font:"Lora", sans-serif !important;}.boost-post:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){min-height:var(--min-height);}.boost-post *{box-sizing:border-box;float:none;}.boost-post .posts-custom .posts-wrapper:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article:before, .boost-post article:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article .row:before, .boost-post article .row:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article .row .col:before, .boost-post article .row .col:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .widget__body:before, .boost-post .widget__body:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .photo-caption:after{content:"";width:100%;height:1px;background-color:#fff;}.boost-post .body:before, .boost-post .body:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .body :before, .boost-post .body :after{display:none !important;}.boost-post__bottom{--article-direction:row;--titles-width:350px;--min-height:346px;--height:315px;--padding:24px 86px 24px 24px;--image-fit:contain;--image-pos:right;--headline-size:36px;--subheadline-size:15px;--text-size:12px;--cta-position:left;}.boost-post__sidebar:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:10px;}.boost-post__in-content:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:40px;}.boost-post__bottom:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:20px;}@media (min-width: 1024px){#sSHARED_-_Social_Desktop_0_0_11_0_0_1_1{padding-left:40px;}}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_14_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_14_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}#sElement_Post_Layout_Press_Release__0_0_1_0_0_11{margin:100px 0;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper{background:none;}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Cornucopia Institute announced it has filed a formal legal complaint with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), alleging that one of the nation's largest industrial egg producers, Michigan-based Herbruck's Poultry Ranch, is violating the federal organic standards by confining their laying hens in buildings on "factory farms" instead of providing legitimate outdoor access as required by law.
[View the full news release at: https://www.cornucopia.org/2011/04/watchdog-claims-organic-valley-herbruck%E2%80%99s-violating-federal-organic-standards/
The Wisconsin-based farm policy research group also filed a similar complaint related to one of the suppliers of Organic Valley, a cooperative that secures most of its eggs from its family-scale farmer members.
"The federal organic standards clearly state that 'year-round access for all animals to the outdoors' is a requirement," states Mark Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst with The Cornucopia Institute. "The tiny porches attached to the henhouses on Herbruck's Poultry Ranch, Petaluma Egg Farm, a major Organic Valley supplier, and a handful of other industrial egg producers, fail to meet either the intent or the letter of the law governing organic production and food labeling."
Herbruck's Poultry Ranch, based in Saranac, Michigan, is principally involved in conventional egg production, raising millions of conventional laying hens that are mostly confined in cages. They also raise, according to the Associated Press, at least 900,000 organic laying hens, principally at their corporate-owned Michigan facility, and in other locations under contract. According to public statements by company representatives, hens raised by Herbruck's do not have access to the outdoors beyond concrete enclosed porches and patios.
"Nobody forced Herbruck's to become certified organic. It's a voluntary program. When this corporation decided to enter the organic market, they assumed a responsibility to their customers and to the organic community as a whole to understand the organic standards, including their intent," states Kastel. "If they chose to look for loopholes in the rules, it is a gamble they willingly took and must be prepared for the consequences."
In September 2010, The Cornucopia Institute released a report that contrasted the exemplary management practices employed by the vast majority of family-scale organic farmers engaged in organic egg production, while spotlighting abuses at "factory farms" -- including Hillandale Farms, a major nationwide industrial egg producer that was implicated in the widespread 2010 salmonella outbreak centered in Iowa.
According to Cornucopia's report, when producers adopt industrial-scale practices that fail to fully comply with the organic standards for livestock production, it places ethical family farmers at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace.
"The people that purchase organic eggs are under the understanding that these eggs are produced in a way to their liking. They are told the hens are able to go out and pick green grass," said Loren Dale Yoder, a certified organic egg producer from Riverside, Iowa. "These are farmers that are cheating."
In addition to the new complaint against Herbruck's, The Cornucopia Institute also filed a separate legal complaint against the country's largest name-brand organic egg marketer, CROPP, the farmer-owned cooperative that markets eggs under the Organic Valley brand. Organic Valley's local eggs on the West Coast are produced by Petaluma Egg Farm, the industrial-scale egg producer that, like Herbruck's, fails to give outdoor access to its laying hens.
Petaluma Egg Farm produces conventional and organic eggs under numerous brand names, including Rock Island, Uncle Eddie's, Judy's Family Farm and Gold Circle, as well as for Organic Valley. It also owns a major refrigerated food distribution company operating in California. According to Petaluma Egg Farm, their outdoor access consists solely of a "sun porch"--which is entirely enclosed and screened to prevent the birds from going outside.
On January 31, the USDA's National Organic Program issued a policy memo clearly indicating their concurrence with the illegitimacy of using enclosed porches as a substitute for true outdoor access for organic poultry.
Organic Valley requires its family farmer-members around the country to provide a minimum of 5 square feet per bird outdoors. The co-op's management says an exception has been made for Petaluma Egg Farm because "state veterinarians and the California Department of Agriculture strongly advocate that birds do not have free-range outdoor access because of the risk of Avian Influenza transmission."
Yet numerous other certified organic egg producers throughout the state of California are legally complying with federal law by providing legitimate outdoor access to their laying hens, including a number of exemplary pasture-based producers (there have been no published reports of avian influenza outbreaks). California organic farmers are bound by the same organic standards as farmers in the rest of the country.
"Sadly, it appears that upper management at CROPP, in their zeal to capitalize on the marketplace cachet of the 'local' food movement, has compromised the values that Organic Valley was founded upon," lamented Kastel. "They used to ship eggs from the Midwest out to California--eggs that were produced by their family-scale members who, based on our research, are overwhelmingly meeting the organic standards."
In response to Cornucopia's initial complaint against Petaluma Egg Farm, CROPP/Organic Valley officials argued that a local Sonoma County, California, ordinance prohibited the birds from going outdoors. However, no such local ordinance was found to exist.
Andrew Smith, an agricultural biologist at the Sonoma County Agricultural Commissioner's office, states, "There are no ordinances that prohibit a commercial egg or other poultry producer from letting birds have access to the outdoors."
In an effort to resolve these issues prior to filing a legal complaint, Cornucopia requested, on a number of occasions, a meeting with the Board of Directors of the CROPP Cooperative, which repeatedly refused to meet.
"We had hoped, by reaching out and supplying our research to the Organic Valley leadership, prior to its public release, that they would have been motivated to institute corrective modifications in their practices," stated Will Fantle, Cornucopia Research Director. "We were operating under the assumption that their farmer-board had not been made aware of some of these problems by their management. We are disappointed they did not take us up on the opportunity."
The organic poultry industry finds itself at a crossroads as the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), the expert citizen advisory panel to the USDA Secretary, has been debating a set of proposed new regulations for poultry and other livestock that would establish housing-density standards and a clearer understanding of what the requirement for outdoor access entails.
The industry's largest operators, such as Herbruck's, as well as the industry lobby/trade group, the United Egg Producers (UEP), have been loudly voicing their opposition to requirements for outdoor space.
At its upcoming meeting, April 26-29 in Seattle, Washington, the NOSB will debate a proposed outdoor stocking rate for organically raised laying hens, currently proposed at 2 square feet per bird--viewed by many industry observers as woefully inadequate and a capitulation to pressure from industrial egg producers.
Cornucopia has been leading an effort to challenge corporate agribusinesses that would like to weaken the organic standards in their effort to legitimize "factory farm" egg production.
Meanwhile, Cornucopia argues that the current standards are "abundantly clear" in requiring outdoor access for all animals, not just a tiny percentage of the birds, and is requesting the USDA to enforce these standards.
"We urge the USDA to take quick enforcement action against these industrial-scale scofflaws that are gaming the system. By doing so, we hope to protect the livelihoods of ethical family-scale organic farmers who are being placed at a distinct competitive disadvantage by corporations that are more than willing to cut corners in the pursuit of profit," concluded Cornucopia's Kastel.
-30-
MORE:
"Ironically, it might be a better environmental choice for Organic Valley to ship eggs from the Midwest, where there is an abundance of family-scale farmers with the right climate, and plenty of land, to produce the required feed, rather than shipping truckloads of corn and soybeans, raised in the Midwest, out to confinement operations like Petaluma Egg Farm in California," added Kastel.
Some industry experts have estimated that it would take multiple loads of chicken feed, shipped from the Midwest, to equal one load of eggs.
"Although local food is almost always fresher, more nutritious and environmentally advantageous, with eggs, which naturally have a long shelf life, this might not be the case," said Kastel.
Petaluma Farms was profiled in the wildly successful bestseller, The Omnivore's Dilemma, by the New York Times contributor and University of California professor, Michael Pollan. In the book, he described Petaluma Egg Farm as an overt example of what he calls "supermarket pastoral," industrial-scale agribusiness masquerading as part of the good food movement by cloaking its products in beautiful photos and prose on their website and packaging.
In addition, Petaluma Egg Farm's owner, Steve Mahrt, outraged family farmers, consumers and animal welfare activists in California by acting as a prominent spokesperson lobbying against the passage of proposition two, a state ballot initiative that successfully banned battery cages for laying hens, a practice that is widely viewed as inhumane.
"Possibly the most egregious misstep by Organic Valley management is to describe an industrial-scale egg producer, Petaluma Egg Farm, as being a "family farmer" and member of their cooperative," said Kastel. "No wonder they referred to Mr. Mahrt and his wife as "Steve and Judy" in their public relations work, using only their first names and referring to their operation not as "Petaluma Egg Farm" but "Judy's Egg Farm."
"Any farmer that can't provide outdoor access, so their chickens can scratch and forage and pick on green grass, don't need to label their eggs as organic," added Iowa certified organic farmer Loren Yoder. "Some producers are attempting to make these porches work but they don't provide chickens the ability to be outside under the blue sky."
Kastel concluded, "What leaves me optimistic, in the case of Organic Valley, is that every time there has been a misstep by their management of this magnitude the farmers that own the cooperative have stepped in to clean up the problem. We fully expect that will occur in this case as well."
In 2008 Cornucopia discovered that Organic Valley was marketing milk from a then 7200-cow mega-dairy in desert-like conditions in Texas. As was the case with their approach in the scandal involving Petaluma Egg Farm, the cooperative's Board of Directors refused to meet with representatives of The Cornucopia Institute.
It took Organic Valley farmer-members stepping in to correct the improprieties. A co-op member, California dairyman Tony Azevedo, said at the time, "This incident should be very reassuring to our many loyal Organic Valley customers. Unlike most business we are not strictly governed by the bottom line."
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
"Launching chaotic trade wars with our allies and gutting Social Security, Medicaid, and other vital programs in order to fund tax breaks for his billionaire donors isn't making life more affordable for working-class families."
A former Obama administration economic adviser said Wednesday that the Federal Reserve's forecast of increased unemployment, accelerating inflation, and slower growth driven by President Donald Trump's economic policies could portend a return of the "stagflation" that plagued the nation in the 1970s.
The Federal Open Markets Committee, which sets U.S. monetary policy, downgraded its economic outlook for 2025 from an initial projection of 2.1% growth to 1.7%. FOMC also revised its inflation forecast upward from 2.5% to 2.8%.
While FOMC said that "recent indicators suggest that economic activity has continued to expand at a solid pace," the committee noted that "uncertainty around the economic outlook has increased."
Fears of an economic slowdown or even a recession have increased dramatically since Trump took office and imposed tariffs on some of the nation's biggest trade partners while moving to gut critical social programs in order to fund a $4.5 trillion tax cut that will overwhelmingly benefit wealthy Americans.
"Inflation has started to move up now. We think partly in response to tariffs and there may be a delay in further progress over the course of this year," Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said during a Wednesday news conference, at which he said interest rates will remain unchanged. "The survey data [of] both household and businesses show significant large rising uncertainty and significant concerns about downside risks."
The economic justice group Groundwork Collaborative said the FOMC projections show that "Trump is steering our economy toward disaster," while warning of the possible return of stagflation, a combination of low or negative economic growth and inflation.
Alex Jacquez, the chief of policy and advocacy at the Groundwork Collaborative and a former adviser at the White House National Economic Council during the Obama administration, said in a statement that "the Federal Reserve's projections confirm what millions of Americans are already thinking: President Trump is steering our economy toward disaster."
"Voters elected President Trump to lower the cost of living, and instead, they continue to be saddled with persistently high inflation and interest rates," Jacquez continued. "Launching chaotic trade wars with our allies and gutting Social Security, Medicaid, and other vital programs in order to fund tax breaks for his billionaire donors isn't making life more affordable for working-class families. It is, however, a perfect recipe for stagflation."
Trump's economic policies—which some observers believe could be designed to deliberately tank the economy so that the ultrawealthy can buy up assets at deep discounts—have sent consumer confidence plummeting. Meanwhile, recent polls have revealed that a majority of voters disapprove of Trump's handling of the economy and inflation.
The latest FOMC forecast came as the world braces for yet another escalation of Trump's trade war, with the president threatening to implement worldwide reciprocal tariffs starting April 2.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) said Monday that Trump's trade war is likely to slow economic growth in the United States and around the world.
"The global economy has shown some real resilience, with growth remaining steady and inflation moving downwards," OECD Secretary-General Mathias Cormann said. "However, some signs of weakness have emerged, driven by heightened policy uncertainty."
"Increasing trade restrictions will contribute to higher costs both for production and consumption," Cormann added. "It remains essential to ensure a well-functioning, rules-based international trading system and to keep markets open."
"We truly urge policymakers, stakeholders, and the public to see these executive orders for what they truly are: an unnecessary and counterproductive retreat to outdated energy strategies."
On the first day of his second term, U.S. President Donald Trump announced he was fulfilling his campaign promise to "drill, baby, drill" by declaring a "national energy emergency." The declaration seeks to spur the "identification, leasing, development, production, transportation, refining, and generation" of every energy source except for wind, solar, battery storage, and improved efficiency.
But what exactly does this mean, and how much damage could it do to local communities, energy prices, the global climate, and the nation's leadership in the green energy transition? Quite a lot, a panel of energy policy experts warned on Wednesday.
"These executive orders and this administration are sending us down exactly the wrong path," said senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center Megan Gibson. "By attempting to fabricate a national energy emergency, these orders set the stage toward increased fossil fuel extraction, transmission, use, and export. This is all over cleaner, more affordable technologies that we have and are commercially scalable."
Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program, warned that "the threat is extremely real, and here right now, that Trump is going to seek to push unneeded fossil fuel projects."
Trump gave himself a major tool to accomplish this in the declaration by evoking national security. Specifically, Section 7 orders Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to conduct an assessment of the department's access to the energy needed to "protect the homeland" and present it within 60 days, or by March 21. The report should examine any vulnerabilities, with a special emphasis on the Northeast and West Coast, where local and state Democratic governments have rejected new fossil fuel projects on climate grounds.
While Trump tried to use national security justifications to speed fossil fuel development during his first term, he was stymied in part by opposition within government agencies. That is less likely to be the case now.
"There is no question that when you add national security designations to civilian energy infrastructure projects, you're putting in the crosshairs any civil servant or citizen who seeks to deviate from Trump's line."
"He has now purged agencies of opposition and has much firmer control over the national security apparatus that he's going to need to use national security justifications for this energy emergency declaration," Slocum said.
Therefore, Hegseth's report could be used to, for example, claim that the energy needs of military bases in the Northeast require the revival of the Constitution pipeline that would bring fracked gas from Pennsylvania to New York, which state leaders had previously rejected.
"This is about a larger issue of attacking parts of the country that didn't vote for him and parts of the country that also have enacted a number of laws and regulations promoting action on climate change and promoting renewables," Slocum said. "And so this is part of a general attack on state leadership of those states that he sees as not being accommodating enough to fossil fuels."
At the same time, the emergency declaration could be used as part of a negotiating tactic with Democratic state leaders. To take New York as an example again, Trump might persuade Gov. Kathy Hochul to accept the Constitution pipeline in exchange for allowing offshore wind or ending opposition to congestion pricing.
"Trump will either force his agenda upon unwilling states, or he will use it as a club to bully them into doing it as part of a horse-trading maneuver," Slocum said.
Using the national security justification could also make it easier for the administration to crack down on not only civil society protests against these projects, but stubborn opposition from local leaders as well. Even elected officials who pushed back, Slocum warned, could be labeled terrorists.
"There is no question that when you add national security designations to civilian energy infrastructure projects, you're putting in the crosshairs any civil servant or citizen who seeks to deviate from Trump's line," he said.
Another provision of the emergency declaration being monitored by advocates is Section 4, which calls on heads of agencies to alert the Army Corps of Engineers to projects they want to see prioritized. The Corps plays an important role in issuing 404 permits for any infrastructure that is built through or beneath a body of water. It also has the authority to rush its permitting process—including by waving or truncating a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review—in the case of an emergency.
Shortly after Trump's declaration, the Army Corps listed several "emergency"-designated projects on its website. However, David Bookbinder, director of law and policy at the Environmental Integrity Project, pointed out, "none of those projects, not a single one, meets the Corps' own definition of what an emergency is."
The Corps can rush a project through only if not doing so poses an immediate threat to life, property, or economic well-being, and it has historically only done so in the aftermath of natural disasters such as floods or hurricanes.
"In the long run, the question is how many times is the Corps going to make groups sue them?"
"No one has ever tried to speed up permitting on the basis of a national energy emergency, let alone a clearly fictitious one," Bookbinder said.
The Army Corps immediately removed the emergency designations of projects on its website once they were discovered, and groups including Bookbinder's have filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the Corps to find out what projects other agencies have told it to fast-track. Those requests are due around the beginning of April.
"As soon as they try permitting one of these projects, cutting the corners and speeding up a permit by designating it as, quote, an emergency, that permit will be challenged," Bookbinder said. "And in the long run, the question is how many times is the Corps going to make groups sue them?"
In the long-term, advocates say, the administration may attempt to use the Corps' ability to rush "emergency" projects in order to bypass NEPA altogether, ignore court orders that try to stop it, and undermine agencies that push back. While the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is supposed to be independent, for example, Trump on Tuesday fired the two Democratic commissioners on the Federal Trade Commission.
"We are very concerned that should Trump perceive any roadblocks at FERC to his energy emergency declaration that he would have no qualms forcibly removing independent FERC commissioners from their seats and replace them with compliant commissioners," Slocum said. "So this is not bluster."
Ultimately, Slocum added, "we are in an era right now where the only norm is Trump is going to violate it."
While the Trump administration is trying to rush through fossil fuel projects, the panelists were clear that his energy agenda will not benefit the majority of U.S. communities and ratepayers.
"If we continue down this path, this self-destructive path, we will miss out on an opportunity to build a vibrant, sustainable energy economy that benefits all Americans, that will actually secure our national energy independence, and would position our country for long-term economic success," Gibson said.
So who will benefit? The clue comes in part in a closed-door meeting the Trump administration held with oil and gas executives in the White House, also on Wednesday.
"Advocates must keep challenging approvals through litigation and public pressure—making the case that the project can and should be denied if there is no genuine need or if adverse impacts are overwhelming."
"After spending $450 million in the last election to elect Trump and install friendly lawmakers on Capitol Hill, fossil fuel executives are getting what they paid for," Slocum said in a statement about the meeting. "We know precisely what the oil industry will do with decreased costs stemming from Trump's deregulation: They will pocket the savings and shower executives and wealthy investors with bonuses and dividends."
"Under Trump, fossil fuel corporations will accelerate the transfer of wealth from consumers to billionaires while exposing millions of Americans to more pollution and delaying the transition to clean energy for as long as possible," he continued.
Slocum further told Common Dreams that "the fossil fuel industry's close ties to Trump and key Trump officials will play a role in decisions Trump has made and will continue to make on the energy emergency declaration and implementation."
Gibson said the emergency declaration was "perpetuating a pattern where major fossil fuel corporations reap substantial profits while the American public and communities have to deal with rising energy prices, higher utility bills, a weakened domestic energy system, not to mention extreme and lasting harms to our communities and our health."
In response, she called on "unlikely partners and coalitions to push for a modern, democratically grounded energy policy that benefits the public."
'It's essential that we continue to hold regulators accountable: Many of FERC's decisions have disregarded states' and communities' objections. Advocates must keep challenging approvals through litigation and public pressure—making the case that the project can and should be denied if there is no genuine need or if adverse impacts are overwhelming," she said.
"We truly urge policymakers, stakeholders, and the public to see these executive orders for what they truly are: an unnecessary and counterproductive retreat to outdated energy strategies," Gibson said. "The real emergency here isn't a lack of fossil fuel extraction, transmission, or export. It's lack of vision and courage, and competent governance to embrace the modern clean energy economy we know we need and deserve."
"We will not be silenced," the green group said in response to the verdict.
This is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
Climate campaigners swiftly sounded the alarm on Wednesday after a North Dakota jury awarded Energy Transfer and its subsidiary more than $660 million in the fossil fuel giant's case targeting Greenpeace for protests against the Dakota Access crude oil pipeline.
While Energy Transfer called the verdict a "win... for the people of Mandan and throughout North Dakota," environmentalist Jon Hinck condemned it as a "travesty of justice."
Hinck and others argue the case against Greenpeace International and two of its entities in the United States is a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) intended to intimidate opponents of climate-wrecking fossil fuel projects.
OUTRAGE: A Big Oil-stacked jury just sided with corporate power, slapping Greenpeace with millions in damages for standing with Indigenous water protectors against DAPL. This is a dangerous attack on the right to protest, but the fight is not over. apnews.com/article/gree...
[image or embed]
— Center for Constitutional Rights ( @ccrjustice.org) March 19, 2025 at 6:04 PM
"This case should alarm everyone, no matter their political inclinations," saidSushma Raman, interim executive director of Greenpeace's U.S. entities, in a statement. "It's part of a renewed push by corporations to weaponize our courts to silence dissent. We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech. These rights are critical for any work toward ensuring justice—and that's why we will continue fighting back together, in solidarity. While Big Oil bullies can try to stop a single group, they can't stop a movement."
As The New York Timesreported Wednesday:
Greenpeace had maintained that it played only a minor part in demonstrations led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. It had portrayed the lawsuit as an attempt to stifle oil industry critics, but a jury apparently disagreed.
The nine-person jury in the Morton County courthouse in Mandan, North Dakota, about 45 minutes north of where the protests took place, returned the verdict after roughly two days of deliberating.
Addressing the legal loss on social media, Greenpeace International vowed that "we will not be silenced."
🚨BREAKING🚨 The trial verdict is in. A jury in the Morton County courthouse found Greenpeace International and two Greenpeace entities in the United States liable for over US$ 660 million combined in Energy Transfer’s meritless SLAPP lawsuit. #WeWillNotBeSilenced
[image or embed]
— Greenpeace International 🌍 ( @greenpeace.org) March 19, 2025 at 5:39 PM
Greenpeace International executive director Mads Christensen echoed that sentiment and pointed to U.S. President Donald Trump's second term as a danger to people and the planet. As the advocacy leader put it: "We are witnessing a disastrous return to the reckless behavior that fueled the climate crisis, deepened environmental racism, and put fossil fuel profits over public health and a livable planet. The previous Trump administration spent four years dismantling protections for clean air, water, and Indigenous sovereignty, and now along with its allies wants to finish the job by silencing protest."
Asked by The Associated Press if Greenpeace plans to appeal just after the verdict, senior legal adviser Deepa Padmanabha said, "We know that this fight is not over."
While the case has sparked fears that a loss in court could end Greenpeace, Padmanabha told AP that the globally known group's work "is never going stop." The adviser added, "That's the really important message today, and we're just walking out and we're going to get together and figure out what our next steps are."
I hate it here. www.nytimes.com/2025/03/19/c...
[image or embed]
— Dr. Genevieve Guenther (she/they) (@doctorvive.bsky.social) March 19, 2025 at 4:19 PM
An independent trial monitoring committee said in a statement that the verdict "reflects a deeply flawed trial with multiple due process violations that denied Greenpeace the ability to present anything close to a full defense."
Marty Garbus, a longtime First Amendment lawyer who is part of the committee, said: "In my six decades of legal practice, I have never witnessed a trial as unfair as the one against Greenpeace that just ended in the courts of North Dakota. This is one of the most important cases in American history."
"The law that can come down in this case can affect any demonstration, religious or political. It's far bigger than the environmental movement. Yet the court in North Dakota abdicated its sacred duty to conduct a fair and public trial and instead let Energy Transfer run roughshod over the rule of law," he added. "Greenpeace has a very strong case on appeal. I believe there is a good chance it ultimately will win both in court and in the court of public opinion."
Greenpeace International general counsel Kristin Casper later said in a statement that "Energy Transfer hasn't heard the last of us in this fight. We're just getting started with our anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Energy Transfer's attacks on free speech and peaceful protest. We will see Energy Transfer in court this July in the Netherlands."
As the
Times detailed, the global group "this year had countersued Energy Transfer in the Netherlands, invoking a new European Union directive against SLAPP suits as well as Dutch law."