This has been a long time coming. Energy Transfer argued that Greenpeace didn’t just cheer from the sidelines—they whipped up a frenzy that crossed legal lines. Meanwhile, Greenpeace is crying foul, clutching their pearls and insisting this lawsuit is a corporate plot to “destroy the right to peaceful protest.” Constitutional rights experts are wringing their hands too, fretting about a “chilling effect” on free speech. Boo-hoo. The jury wasn’t buying the sob story, and now Greenpeace is staring down a payout that might just bankrupt their U.S. outfit. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch.

Deepa Padmanabha, Greenpeace’s senior legal adviser, tried to spin it:

“What we saw over these three weeks was Energy Transfer’s blatant disregard for the voices of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. And while they also tried to distort the truth about Greenpeace’s role in the protests, we instead reaffirmed our unwavering commitment to non-violence in every action we take.”

Nice try, Deepa, but the jury saw through the sanctimony. Energy Transfer even played a clever card, suing three Greenpeace entities as one big happy family—checkmate.

So, what’s the takeaway? Is this a glorious win for holding activist groups accountable when their antics go too far? You bet it is. Greenpeace had it coming, and now they’re squirming. Sure, they’ll wail about corporate overreach and appeal until the cows come home, but for now, let’s savor the moment. The Dakota Access Pipeline’s been pumping oil for years despite their tantrums, and this ruling? It’s the cherry on top.