Trial begins as Greenpeace argues impartiality of jury in local setting, citing past protest disruptions in Morton County.
**Greenpeace Faces Hurdles in Legal Battle Against Pipeline Company**
**Greenpeace Faces Hurdles in Legal Battle Against Pipeline Company**
Environmental organization seeks fair trial amidst ongoing lawsuit linked to Dakota Access Pipeline protests.
In a critical trial underway in Morton County, North Dakota, Greenpeace is embroiled in a multimillion-dollar lawsuit initiated by the pipeline operator Energy Transfer, stemming from the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The opening week presented challenges for the environmental group as its legal team expressed concerns regarding the jury's impartiality and sought a transfer of the trial outside of Morton County.
Greenpeace's legal representatives filed a petition with the North Dakota Supreme Court, stating that the disruptions caused by the protests throughout 2016 and 2017 have affected the community's ability to fairly judge the case. The protests, which attracted numerous participants and international media attention, occurred near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation and were marked by some violent confrontations.
In 2019, Energy Transfer accused Greenpeace of inciting protests that hindered construction progress, claiming damages related to delays, attacks on its workers, and damage to equipment. However, Greenpeace asserts that their involvement was minor and they intended to support Native American activists through peaceful demonstrations.
Lawyers for Greenpeace have pointed out perceived flaws in the jury selection process, emphasizing that the local jurors are predisposed due to their personal experiences with the protests. Following the completion of jury selection, they reiterated their request to transfer the trial to Fargo, arguing that a fair trial is unattainable in the county where significant protests took place. As the trial continues, the complexities of balancing local sentiments with justice remain a key concern for both Greenpeace and the legal system.
Greenpeace's legal representatives filed a petition with the North Dakota Supreme Court, stating that the disruptions caused by the protests throughout 2016 and 2017 have affected the community's ability to fairly judge the case. The protests, which attracted numerous participants and international media attention, occurred near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation and were marked by some violent confrontations.
In 2019, Energy Transfer accused Greenpeace of inciting protests that hindered construction progress, claiming damages related to delays, attacks on its workers, and damage to equipment. However, Greenpeace asserts that their involvement was minor and they intended to support Native American activists through peaceful demonstrations.
Lawyers for Greenpeace have pointed out perceived flaws in the jury selection process, emphasizing that the local jurors are predisposed due to their personal experiences with the protests. Following the completion of jury selection, they reiterated their request to transfer the trial to Fargo, arguing that a fair trial is unattainable in the county where significant protests took place. As the trial continues, the complexities of balancing local sentiments with justice remain a key concern for both Greenpeace and the legal system.
