Fossil-fuel billionaire Kelcy Warren is about to land a knockout punch on Greenpeace.
The pipeline magnate’s company, Energy Transfer, is behind a lawsuit that Greenpeace says could bankrupt the environmental group’s U.S. affiliate. A courtroom victory, which some Greenpeace officials fear is likely, would be a coda in the nearly decadelong battle between the two sides over one of Warren’s signature projects: the Dakota Access Pipeline.
In 2016, Greenpeace, Native American tribal groups and thousands of other activists camped in a remote corner of North Dakota to block the project. The monthslong protests impeded the oil pipeline’s completion and became a flashpoint in the fight over fossil fuels. Images of sometimes violent confrontations between protesters and law enforcement made international news.
Warren ultimately completed the conduit, but the fight wasn’t over for him.
Warren sees green activists, who he once said should be “removed from the gene pool,” as a serious threat to the industry. Starting with protests of Keystone XL, which successfully derailed that project, activists have targeted pipelines across the country.
“Everybody is afraid of these environmental groups and the fear that it may look wrong if you fight back with these people,” Warren said in a 2017 TV interview. “But what they did to us is wrong, and they’re gonna pay for it.”Now the pugnacious tycoon, who is valued at more than $7 billion, is within spitting distance of dealing a serious blow to Greenpeace—and the U.S. green movement.
Energy Transfer’s lawsuit alleges several Greenpeace entities incited the Dakota Access protests, funded attacks to damage the pipeline, and spread misinformation about the company and its project. The case is set for trial in February in a North Dakota state court, where both sides expect a fossil-fuel-friendly jury. Energy Transfer is seeking $300 million in damages, which would likely wipe out Greenpeace USA, according to the group’s leadership.
In Ghana’s Fourth Republic, justice increasingly competes with time. Courtrooms from Accra to Tamale groan…
This case interrogates the boundaries between resignation and constructive dismissal, and clarifies the evidential burden…
Modern justice delivery has quietly displaced a major part of the action in the witness…
Beyond capital thresholds, the new Act strengthens local participation requirements, including a 75% local skilled…
But the fact that we argue through writs, not coups, is the Court’s victory.From Chalmers…
Once a court has completed a case, it washes its hands and moves forward without…