Background

Energy Transfer, the company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline, is suing Greenpeace for $300 million in North Dakota state court. The lawsuit alleges that Greenpeace masterminded the 2016-2017 Standing Rock protests against the pipeline. A previous federal lawsuit by Energy Transfer against Greenpeace was dismissed in 2019 for insufficient evidence.

The current lawsuit is widely considered a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) - a legal tactic typically used to burden critics with costly litigation. North Dakota, where the case is being heard, lacks anti-SLAPP legislation that could protect defendants from such suits.

Greenpeace maintains that its involvement in the Standing Rock protests was limited to supporting the Indigenous-led movement through sign-on letters and social media. The organization has recently filed a counter-lawsuit in the EU under their new anti-SLAPP directive.

Resolution Criteria

This market will resolve YES if:

• Energy Transfer wins the lawsuit and is awarded any monetary damages against Greenpeace

This market will resolve NO if:

• The lawsuit is dismissed

• Energy Transfer loses at trial

• Energy Transfer withdraws the lawsuit

• The case is settled without Greenpeace paying damages

The market will resolve N/A if the case is still pending by January 1, 2026.

Considerations

• SLAPP suits historically have a low success rate when they reach final judgment

• The previous dismissal of Energy Transfer's federal lawsuit may indicate weakness in their current case

• The parallel EU legal proceedings could impact this case's trajectory

• The lack of anti-SLAPP laws in North Dakota may affect Greenpeace's ability to defend itself effectively