Federal Court Dismisses Resolute SLAPP Suit Against Greenpeace

Today, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed all claims in the controversial case that major logging company Resolute Forest Products ^[2] filed against Greenpeace Inc., Greenpeace Fund, and Greenpeace International, Stand.earth and individual defendants, including claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) act.

The court's decision sends a clear message to corporations that attacks on core democratic values like freedom of speech and legitimate advocacy on issues of public interest will not be tolerated. District Judge Jon S. Tigar wrote in his order dismissing the case that "the defendants' speech constituted the expression of opinion, or different viewpoints that [are] a vital part of our democracy." Noting that "Greenpeace's publications at issue rely on scientific research or fact", the judge added that "[t]he academy, and not the courthouse, is the appropriate place to resolve scientific disagreements of this kind."

Resolute will be allowed to amend its filing as a formality, but Greenpeace is confident that any such attempt will meet a similar fate.

Greenpeace USA General Counsel Tom Wetterer said in response to the decision:

"We are pleased the court unequivocally threw out this attempt to abuse our legal system and silence legitimate criticism on matters of public concern. This is very positive news for all of us, for the values that we share, and for Canada's boreal forest. Resolute's claim that organizations and activists committed to the conservation of the forests were part of a criminal enterprise is absurd and a sad symptom of a wider assault on constitutional rights and democracy. The logging company's allegations were a clear attempt to silence the voices that advocate for the environment. Recently, Energy Transfer Partners -- the oil company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline -- decided to follow a strikingly similar path ^[3] under the legal wing of none other than Trump's go-to law firm. The similarities are apparent and this underhanded playbook targeting free speech should be a cause of real concern. We're grateful that the court has shown today it is a losing playbook, but that doesn't mean corporate bullies like ETP won't stop trying to use it.

"Energy Transfer's case repackages many of the spurious allegations and legal claims made against Greenpeace by the Kasowitz firm on behalf of Resolute. The decision on the Resolute suit should be a clear indication that Energy Transfer's case has no future. Both are classic SLAPPs, or strategic lawsuits against public participation. These cases don't seek justice. They intend to silence free speech through expensive, time-consuming litigation. This pattern of harassment by corporate bullies led by Trump's go-to attorneys must be stopped in its tracks."

Greenpeace USA Senior Forest Campaigner Daniel Brindis added:

"The judge's decision to dismiss the case affirms that Resolute's divisive and bullying tactics are a waste of time and resources. It is time for Resolute to finally work with environmental organizations including Greenpeace to address their destructive forestry operations and forge a collaborative and sustainable path forward. Instead of spending more valuable resources to amend this lawsuit, Greenpeace hopes Resolute will finally be ready to work together to find solutions. Thousands in Canada and around the world have called for the protection of the forest, it's time for Resolute to listen to them too. The world needs a healthy boreal forest and together we can develop long term sustainable solutions that respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples, protect local communities and ensure the survival of species at risk like the Woodland Caribou. "