For the associated 501(c)(3), see Greenpeace Fund (nonprofit)

Greenpeace is one of the most internationally recognized environmentalist organizations. It is well-known for its attention-seeking stunts and radical views. Greenpeace has also sought to actively sabotage those industries it sees as harmful to the environment. ¹

Greenpeace supports far-left environmental legislation and is a proponent of a Green New Deal. It is also opposed to the use of readily available fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas. ¹ It opposes zero-emission nuclear energy.² The organization is also opposed to expanding food production and nutrition by the use of genetic technology.³

History

Greenpeace had in origins in the opposition to nuclear weapons testing off the coast of Alaska.⁴ In the 1960s, the United States was planning to test nuclear weapons under the island of Amchitka in the Aleutians. Activists in British Columbia opposed the nuclear test because they believed it could trigger earthquakes and tsunami. ¹

The anti-nuclear activists formed a group called the Society for Pollution and Environmental Control (SPEC). In October 1969, 6,000 anti-nuclear protesters led by SPEC had shut down a U.S.-Canada border crossing near Vancouver, British Columbia. The protesters shut the border crossing down for an hour.⁴

Later in October 1969, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) conducted the Milrow test on Amchitka.⁵ After the Milrow test, activists with SPEC and Sierra Club Canada formed the Don’t Make A Wave Committee, which took its name from the warnings they issued about a tsunami they claimed the nuclear tests would create. ⁵

The DMAW started by organizing potential allies in opposition to the nuclear test. It soon gained the backing of certain students, women’s groups, and Quakers. The first leaders were Irving Stowe, Jim Bohlen, and Paul Cote. But the group normally made decisions as a committee.⁴ This group would later become Greenpeace, named after the combination of “green” for the environment and “peace” after the anti-war movement.⁴

Setting the stage for the future, the DMAW sought to keep a “respectable” public image, but at the same time it encouraged radicals to join.⁴ Its first major action was a joint protest with SPEC of the U.S. consulate in Vancouver. In addition to protests and a propaganda campaign against the nuclear tests, DMAW decided in January 1970 to sail a ship into the nuclear test zone to try to stop the test. The ship was called the Greenpeace.⁴ The DMAW announced its plans in newspapers and organized a concert to pay for the ship and raise money. This was the first example of “direct action” that would become a staple of Greenpeace activity.⁴

On September 15, 1971 the Greenpeace set sail for Amchitka. The ship was intercepted by the U.S. Coast Guard and, due to bad weather, was forced to turn back to Canada. But the test was indefinitely postponed on September 23.⁴

President Richard Nixon announced a November 4 deadline for the test on October 27, 1971. DMAW then tried to send a second ship, the faster Greenpeace II, into the test area. However, storms kept the ship from its destination. The nuclear test occurred on November 6, 1971. In 1972, the AEC announced that it was abandoning the rest of its planned nuclear tests on the island.⁴

After the nuclear tests on Amchitka were over, the organization then shifted its focus to French atmospheric nuclear tests on French Polynesia. In 1973, David McTaggart sailed his yacht, which he renamed the Greenpeace II, into the French nuclear testing zone in the Pacific. The first attempt led the French Navy to deliberately ram and cripple the Greenpeace II. However, the ship was repaired and returned to the testing zone. This time it was boarded by French sailors who beat the crew, nearly blinding McTaggart.⁶ After the incident was made public, the French agreed to stop all atmospheric nuclear testing.⁶

Greenpeace then shifted its focus to anti-whaling efforts. At the same time, more groups around the world began popping up with the name “Greenpeace.” The first anti-whaling mission set out in June 1975 when the Phyllis Cormack set sail from Vancouver. The ship encountered a Russian whaler and the activists put themselves between the Russian ship’s harpoons and the whales.⁷ In 1977, another Greenpeace ship left Hawaii and it too encountered another Russian whaler. However, there were no whales to protect so the Greenpeace activists just boarded the Russian ship and passed out Russian language anti-whaling pamphlets.⁷ In 1982, the International Whaling Commission imposed a moratorium on commercial whaling.

Activities

Opposition to Fossil Fuels

Greenpeace is opposed to the use and extraction of all fossil fuels, which power most of the world. It has led protests and direct-action campaigns against drilling in the Arctic. In 2015, Greenpeace activists dangled from a bridge in Portland, Oregon to protest Shell Oil’s plans to drill in the Arctic. The bridge danglers were part of a human barrier that attempted to prevent an icebreaker leased by Shell from leaving port. The icebreaker eventually did break the human blockade.⁸

Activists have also campaigned against Arctic drilling by everyone from the Russians to the Norwegians. On September 18, 2013, the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise sailed near the Prirazlomnaya drilling platform and deployed four smaller boats. Those boats were full of Greenpeace activists who tried to board the drilling platform. The three activists who did successfully board the platform were detained by the Russian coast guard. The next day, Russian authorities boarded the ship, seized control of it, and detained all crew members.⁹ The crew members were held for two months on piracy and hooliganism charges until they were released as a part of an amnesty.¹⁰

In 2015, Greenpeace published a report claiming that the entire world could transition to 100% renewable technologies by 2050.¹ In that report, Greenpeace warned that the transition towards 100% renewable energy had to be well underway by 2020 in order to mitigate the worst effects of climate change.¹ Its report, however, warned the cost of electricity would be higher under the plan. The report says that it would cost somewhere between $48 trillion to $64.4 trillion in order to make the investments necessary to phase out fossil fuels.¹

Opposition to Nuclear

Greenpeace is opposed to all uses of nuclear power. In December 2016, Greenpeace protested in front of French state-owned utility EDF. It called for France to shutter its nuclear electric generating capacity.¹¹ In March, Greenpeace helped to organize protests on the sixth anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear accident, calling for an end to the use of nuclear power.¹²

Nuclear power plants produce no carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gas emissions, and as of 2021 accounted for 19 percent of American electricity production—the largest source of zero carbon electricity in the United States. ¹³ An October 2018 proposal from The Nature Conservancy noted that zero-carbon nuclear plants produced 7.8 percent of total world energy output and recommended reducing carbon emissions by increasing nuclear capacity to 33 percent of total world energy output. ¹⁴

In May of 2021, Greenpeace USA was one of 715 groups and businesses listed as a co-signer on a letter to the leadership of the U.S. House and Senate that referred to nuclear energy as a “dirty” form of energy production and a “significant” source of pollution. The letter asked federal lawmakers to reduce carbon emissions by creating a “renewable electricity standard” that promoted production of weather dependent power sources such as wind turbines and solar panels, but did not promote low carbon natural gas and zero carbon nuclear energy. ¹⁵

Opposition to Modern Agriculture

Greenpeace is opposed to modern agricultural practices and techniques such as the use of genetically modified crops. On several occasions, its members have destroyed genetically engineered crops. ¹⁶

In 2011, Greenpeace activists destroyed an entire crop of genetically modified wheat that was under trials in Australia.¹⁶ The activists broke into a farm in Canberra and used weed eaters to destroy the wheat. The activists wore hazmat suits emblazoned with the Greenpeace logo on them.¹⁶

In 2009, Greenpeace protested against genetically modified corn in Mexico. The country experimented with a type of genetically modified corn that would be used for animal feed. Greenpeace activists draped anti-GMO banners on the Angel of Independence, which is one of Mexico City’s landmark monuments.¹⁷

Greenpeace’s opposition to genetically modified foods has drawn criticism from the scientific community. Patrick Moore, a founding member of Greenpeace who has since left the organization, has condemned the group’s opposition to the “golden rice,” a strain of rice that is genetically enhanced to provide Vitamin A. In an interview in 2014, Moore said that his former comrades were condemning 2 million children to death.¹⁸ In 2016, 107 Nobel laureates signed an open letter to Greenpeace condemning its opposition to GMOs.³

Greenpeace has also vocally opposed fish farming. In 2004, the Arctic Sunrise joined a flotilla of fishing and sport boats that sailed toward fish farms off the coast of British Columbia. While the Greenpeace fleet did not attempt to interfere with operations, it hoisted an anti-fish farming banner.¹⁹

Not Above the Law Coalition

Greenpeace is a member of the Not Above the Law Coalition, which was founded in 2017 to oppose President Donald Trump. The Coalition supported the indictment of then-former President Trump on federal charges related to document retention and other criminal charges during the Biden presidency. It has organized events to oppose the second Trump administration following Trump’s return to the presidency. Members of the coalition include Common Cause, Daily Kos, the Defend Democracy Action Project, Greenpeace USA, Indivisible, J Street, the League of Conservation Voters, MoveOn, NextGen America, Our Revolution, People For the American Way, People Power United, Public Citizen, Public Wise, the Secure Elections Network, Stand Up America, the Congressional Integrity Project, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, and the Workers Circle. ²⁰

The Not Above the Law Coalition was among several left-wing advocacy groups that organized national “Hands Off!” protests in April 2025 in opposition to the Trump administration’s efforts to downsize the federal government and Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s role as a White House advisor with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Several such protests were held at Tesla dealerships to oppose Musk’s involvement in the administration. ^{21 22}

Other Issues

Greenpeace has been an opponent of modern forestry practices. It has led protests of logging operations from Canada to Poland. It has also targeted corporations that manufacture wood products. Greenpeace even protested fast food giant KFC over rainforest deforestation.²³

Greenpeace doesn’t just advocate on environmental issues. It has sought to tie itself to the larger progressive movement. It was among the groups pledging to “resist” President Donald Trump who also attacked Trump’s decision to approve the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines.²⁴

Greenpeace is also a founding member of the Democracy Alliance, which is a donors’ collaborative of progressive organizations designed to build progressive political infrastructure .²⁵ It is also a member of “UnKoch My Campus,” which is designed to pressure universities to refuse donations from libertarian businessman and philanthropist Charles Koch.²⁶

The organization endorses the policies of the broader political left, even outside the environmental agenda. Greenpeace is also a strong opponent of voter ID laws and endorsed a renewal of the Voting Rights Act. It has also endorsed gun control laws. ²⁷

In 2023, Greenpeace was among dozens of left-of-center and far-left advocacy groups that supported Democratic Party-backed legislation in Congress called the Judiciary Act of 2023, which would have “packed” the Supreme Court by adding four new justices to the court to be appointed by then-President Joe Biden. ²⁸

In response to the second inauguration of President Donald Trump and environmental agenda rollbacks, Greenpeace USA launched a global #TimeToResist campaign. Actions across the country included a banner at the National Archives reading “We the People: Preserve, Protect, Defend,” and a projection on the Golden Gate Bridge that stated “We the People Will Resist.” ²⁹

In June 2025, Greenpeace participated in organizing or supporting protests branded under the “#NoKings” banner, a national day of demonstrations positioned as a defense of democratic norms against President Donald Trump. These events were part of a larger mobilization involving over 70 Democratic Party affiliates and allied organizations across at least 19 U.S. states and multiple international locations, according to publicly available event listings on Mobilize.us, a Democratic Party-aligned organizing platform. ^{30 31}

During the 2025 United Nations negotiations on a global plastics treaty, Greenpeace condemned the Trump administration’s opposition to global caps on plastic production. When a leaked memo revealed the U.S. urged member states to reject caps on plastic production, Greenpeace denounced the position as echoing previous tactics undermining international progress in addressing pollution. At an August 2025 plastics treaty negotiation session in Geneva, Greenpeace activists poured black oil-like paint across the entrance of the Palais des Nations to protest the presence of petrochemical industry representatives at the negotiations. ³²

Controversies

Chevron Environmental Damage Lawsuit (2018)

In 2009, then-New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (D) threatened to investigate the energy company Chevron while the company was a defendant in a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit in Ecuador. The lawsuit charged Chevron with environmental damages to the Amazon rainforest in Ecuador, even though the company had not actually drilled for oil there. ³³

According to court-ordered released emails for the trial, Cuomo was pushed to threaten legal action against Chevron by his former aide, Karen Hinton, and her husband, Howard Glaser, another former staffer for Cuomo.^{34 35} Cuomo subsequently filed a letter accusing Chevron of financial fraud which was later used by the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, including the main lawyer, Steven Donziger.

Chevron’s internal reports show that Donziger paid Greenpeace activist Rex Weyler $15,000 to write “Chevron’s Amazon Chernobyl Case moves to Canada,” an environmentalist blog article against the company.³³³⁶

Donziger has since been disbarred from practicing law in New York due to his corrupt conduct during the trial.³⁷

Shell Lawsuit (2024)

December 2024, oil and gas company Shell settled a London-based lawsuit it brought against Greenpeace following a protest in which activists boarded a Shell vessel in the Spanish-controlled Canary Islands and traveled on the ship as far as Norway. Greenpeace agreed to pay £300,000 (approximately $383,000 USD) to the Royal National Lifeboat Institution and refrain from demonstrations at four North Sea offshore drilling sites. Greenpeace previously said Shell was seeking up to $2.1 million, including costs related to shipping delays and expenses for extra security, though Shell’s lawsuit sought slightly less than $1 million. ³⁸

Dakota Access Pipeline Lawsuit (2025)

In 2017, Energy Transfer Partners, the developers behind the Dakota Access Pipeline, filed a federal racketeering lawsuit against Greenpeace over the group’s alleged role in delaying the pipeline’s construction. Protests against the pipeline focused primarily on a stretch that crosses near the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. Energy Transfer claimed that Greenpeace, along with other environmentalist groups, caused billions of dollars in damage, spread misinformation, and led a “network of putative not-for-profits and rogue eco-terrorist groups,” such as Earth First! and BankTrack, against the construction of the pipeline. A federal judge later dismissed this case. ³⁹ In 2019, Energy Transfer filed another lawsuit in North Dakota state court, claiming that Greenpeace and other environmentalist groups led an “unlawful and violent scheme to cause financial harm to Energy Transfer.”⁴⁰

Energy Transfer claimed in its suit that Greenpeace defamed the company. Greenpeace denied these allegations, arguing that it played only a minor role in the demonstrations, and supported nonviolent protest. The trial focused on nine statements made by Greenpeace, which accused Energy Transfer of using aggressive tactics and desecrating burial grounds. The company said these statements were part of a false and “malicious publicity campaign” that caused financial losses, including a five-month delay in the pipeline’s construction. Energy Transfer also claimed that Greenpeace paid protestors and provided them with equipment to disrupt the construction of the pipeline. Greenpeace argued that the protests were led primarily by the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, and that Greenpeace’s role was exaggerated by Energy Transfer. ⁴¹

In March 2025, a North Dakota jury ruled that Greenpeace must pay $667 million in damages to Energy Transfer. A spokesperson for Greenpeace said that the group planned to appeal the verdict.⁴¹

According to the verdict, the two American Greenpeace affiliates, Greenpeace Fund and Greenpeace USA, owed $535 million of the total, which equals 10 years of the groups’ combined revenues. Greenpeace said that the damages award could force the group to close its doors. ⁴²

As of October 2025, former Greenpeace General Counsel Jay Meisel and former Greenpeace senior legal advisor Deepa Padmanabha have left their positions amid the organization attempting to appeal the jury ruling from back in March 2025. ⁴³

Funding

Greenpeace claims it doesn’t receive funding from corporations or governments. Instead, it relies on donations from foundations and individuals. The organization does not have a political action committee (PAC). ⁴⁴

As of 2025, Charity Navigator has a warning on its Greenpeace profile urging potential contributors to “proceed with increased caution” due to the group’s “Confirmed Other Material Illegal Activity.” ⁴⁴ In 2023, Greenpeace raised $40 million and spent $38 million. ⁴⁵

Among the donors to Greenpeace are major left-of-center foundations such as the Tides Foundation, which has donated at least $250,000 to the group.⁴⁶ In October 2014, the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation donated $2 million.⁴⁷ The Oak Foundation also paid Greenpeace Canada an undisclosed sum to advocate against oil and gas exploration in Canada.⁴⁸ In 2013, the Park Foundation donated an undisclosed sum to fund “opposition research” regarding fracking.²⁶

From 2015 to 2023, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Foundation for the Carolinas, and Cabin Road Foundation all gave the group over $10 million each. Other large donors included the Hewlett Foundation, the Goatie Foundation, and Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors. ⁴²

1. Hill, Joshua. 2015. “New Greenpeace Report Outlines Pathway To 100% Renewable Energy By 2050”. Cleantechnica. Accessed May 17 2017. https://cleantechnica.com/2015/09/22/new-greenpeace-report-outlines-pathway-100-renewable-energy-2050/.
2. Depleted Cranium “Greenpeace Issues “Top Ten” Against Nuclear Power”. 2017. Depletedcranium.Com. Accessed May 17 2017. http://depletedcranium.com/files/greenpeace-issues-top-ten-against-nuclear-power/.
3. Achenbach, Joel “107 Nobel Laureates Sign Letter Blasting Greenpeace Over Gmos”. 2016. Washington Post. Accessed May 17 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/06/29/more-than-100-nobel-laureates-take-on-greenpeace-over-gmo-stance/?utm_term=.43daadceb850.
4. “Canadians Campaign Against Nuclear Testing On Amchitka Island (Don’T Make A Wave), 1969-1971 | Global Nonviolent Action Database”. 2017. Nvdatabase.Swarthmore.Edu. Accessed May 17 2017. http://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/canadians-campaign-against-nuclear-testing-amchitka-island-don-t-make-wave-1969-1971.
5. “Canadians Campaign Against Nuclear Testing On Amchitka Island (Don’t Make A Wave), 1969-1971 | Global Nonviolent Action Database”. 2017. Nvdatabase.Swarthmore.Edu. Accessed May 17 2017. http://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/canadians-campaign-against-nuclear-testing-amchitka-island-don-t-make-wave-1969-1971.
6. Wittner, Lawrence “A Peace Ship’s Challenge To Nukes”. 2014. Consortiumnews. Accessed May 17 2017. https://consortiumnews.com/2014/04/10/a-peace-ships-challenge-to-nukes/.
7. “Greenpeace Campaigns Against Whaling, 1975-1982 | Global Nonviolent Action Database”. 2017. Nvdatabase.Swarthmore.Edu. Accessed May 17 2017. http://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/greenpeace-campaigns-against-whaling-1975-1982.
8. Hauser, Christine. 2015. “Greenpeace Activists Dangle From Oregon Bridge For 2Nd Day To Protest Arctic Drilling”. Nytimes.Com. Accessed May 17 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/31/us/greenpeace-activists-dangle-from-oregon-bridge-for-2nd-day-to-protest-arctic-drilling.html.
9. “Russia ‘Seizes’ Greenpeace Ship After Arctic Rig Protest – BBC News”. 2013. BBC News. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24170129.
10. Vidal, John. 2014. “Arctic 30: Russia Releases Greenpeace Ship”. The Guardian. Accessed May 17 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/06/arctic-30-sunrise-russia-to-release-greenpeace-ship.
11. “Greenpeace Activists Target EDF Paris HQ In Anti-Nuclear Protest”. 2016. Reuters. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-nuclear-greenpeace-idUSKBN1431A4.
12. Rush, Claire. 2017.”French Anti-Nuclear Activists Mark Fukishima Anniversary”. RFI. Accessed May 17 2017. http://en.rfi.fr/france/20170312-six-years-after-fukushima-anti-nuclear-activists-protest-france.
13. “Nuclear explained.” U.S. Energy Information Administration. Accessed July 25, 2023. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/us-nuclear-industry.php
14. “The Science of Sustainability.” The Nature Conservancy. October 13, 2018. Accessed July 25, 2023. https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-insights/perspectives/the-science-of-sustainability/
15. Letter from Center for Biological Diversity et. al. to U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Joe Manchin, and Rep. Frank Pallone. “RE: CONGRESS SHOULD ENACT A FEDERAL RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY STANDARD AND REJECT GAS AND FALSE SOLUTIONS.” May 12, 2021. Accessed July 25, 2023. https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/energy-justice/pdfs/2021-5-12_600-Group-Letter-for-RES.pdf?_gl=1*1c9h3t8*_gcl_au*MTc3NjM3MTM1Mi4xNjg5OTU1MzAz
16. Nairn, Jessica. 2011 “Greenpeace Destroys GM Wheat”. ABC News. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-14/20110714-greenpeace-gm-protest/2794272.
17. Brice, Arthur. 2009. “Greenpeace Protests Genetically Modified Corn In Mexico – CNN.Com”. Cnn.Com. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/10/20/greenpeace.mexico/index.html?_s=PM:WORLD.
18. Connor, Steve. 2014. “Former Greenpeace Leading Light Condemns Them For Opposing GM ‘Golden”. The Independent. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/former-greenpeace-leading-light-condemns-them-for-opposing-gm-golden-rice-crop-that-could-save-two-9097170.html.
19. Hume,Mark. 2004. “Greenpeace Sails Into Fish-Farm Debate”. The Globe And Mail. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/greenpeace-sails-into-fish-farm-debate/article4123331/.
20. “Not Above the Law Coalition Reacts to Trump Indictment in Classified Documents Case.” Constitutional Accountability Center. June 9, 2023. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.theusconstitution.org/news/release-not-above-the-law-coalition-reacts-to-trump-indictment-in-classified-documents-case/
21. ^[1] Treisman, Rachel. “‘Hands Off’ Protesters Gather in Washington, D.C., to Oppose Abortion Restrictions.” NPR. April 5, 2025. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.npr.org/2025/04/05/nx-s1-5353388/hands-off-protests-washington-dc
22. “Hands Off Protest – Washington, D.C.” Mobilize. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.mobilize.us/handsoff/event/769107/
23. Gazaway, Charles. 2017. “Greenpeace Takes Rainforest Protest To KFC Headquarters”. Wave3.Com. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.wave3.com/story/18602500/greenpeace-takes-rainforest-protest-to-kfc-headquarters.
24. “A Complete Disregard For Democracy: Greenpeace Condemns Trump’s Move On Pipelines & Silencing Of EPA”. 2017. Democracy Now!. Accessed May 17 2017. https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/25/a_complete_disregard_for_democracy_greenpeace.
25. Kroll, Andy. 2013. “Revealed: The Massive New Liberal Plan To Remake American Politics”. Mother Jones. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/democracy-initiative-campaign-finance-filibuster-sierra-club-greenpeace-naacp.
26. Markay, Lachlan. 2015. “Deep-Pocketed Donors Behind Campus Anti-Koch Movement – Washington Free Beacon”. Washington Free Beacon. Accessed May 17 2017. http://freebeacon.com/issues/deep-pocketed-donors-behind-campus-anti-koch-movement/.
27. Follett, Andrew. 2016. “Greenpeace Launches New Social Justice Campaign, ‘Don’T Worry About The Planet’”. The Daily Caller. Accessed May 17 2017. http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/04/greenpeace-launches-new-social-justice-campaign-dont-worry-about-the-planet/.
28. “Sen. Markey, Rep. Johnson Announce Legislation to Expand Supreme Court, Restore Its Legitimacy Alongside Sen. Smith, Reps. Bush, and Schiff.” U.S. Senator Ed Markey. May 16, 2023. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.markey.senate.gov/news/press-releases/05/16/2023/sen-markey-rep-johnson-announce-legislation-to-expand-supreme-court-restore-its-legitimacy-alongside-sen-smith-reps-bush-and-schiff
29. “It’s Time to Resist.” Greenpeace USA. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/timetoresist/
30. “Partners.” No Kings. Accessed June 25, 2025. https://www.nokings.org/partners.
31. Nomani, Asra. “Asra Nomani: The Familiar Hidden Hand behind Today’s #nokings Protests.” Fox News, June 14, 2025.https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/asra-nomani-familiar-hidden-hand-behind-todays-nokings-protests.
32. “Greenpeace Activists Paint Geneva Streets Black to Call Out Big Oil’s Chokehold on Global Plastic Treaty Talks, Demand UN Kicks Out Fossil Fuel Lobbyists.” Greenpeace International. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/press-release/77716/greenpeace-activists-paint-geneva-streets-black-to-call-out-big-oils-chokehold-on-global-plastic-treaty-talks-demand-un-kicks-out-fossil-fuel-lobbyists/
33. Williamson, Kevin D. “Green Floyd: Roger Waters and the Great Green Chevron Scam.” National Review. October 30, 2018. Accessed November 08, 2018. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/chevron-case-shakedown-ecuador-roger-waters/.
34. Schwartz, John. “Ex-Aide Said She Drew Cuomo, as Attorney General, Into Rain Forest Case.” The New York Times. October 11, 2011. Accessed November 08, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/nyregion/documents-in-chevron-suit-show-lobbyists-contacts-with-cuomo.html.
35. Rubinstein, Dana. “The Cost and Benefit of Karen Hinton.” POLITICO. July 16, 2015. Accessed November 08, 2018. https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2015/07/the-cost-and-benefit-of-karen-hinton-000000.
36. Weyler, Rex. “Chevron’s Amazon Chernobyl Case Moves to Canada.” Intercontinental Cry. September 22, 2017. Accessed November 08, 2018. https://intercontinentalcry.org/chevrons-amazon-chernobyl-case-moves-canada/.
37. Krauss, Michael I. “Chevron-Ecuador Sequel: Steven Donziger Suspended From The Practice Of Law.” Forbes. July 10, 2018. Accessed November 08, 2018. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelkrauss/2018/07/10/chevron-ecuador-sequel-steven-donziger-suspended-from-the-practice-of-law/#7ac2af9c3cef.
38. “Shell Settles Lawsuit Against Greenpeace Over Activists Boarding Oil Vessel.” Reuters. December 10, 2024. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/legal/shell-settles-lawsuit-against-greenpeace-over-activists-boarding-oil-vessel-2024-12-10/
39. Dwyer, Colin. “Dakota Access Pipeline Owner Sues Greenpeace for ‘Criminal Activity.’” NPR, August 22, 2017. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/22/545310247/dakota-access-pipeline-owner-sues-greenpeace-for-criminal-activity.
40. Brady, Jeff. “Greenpeace Faces a $300 Million Lawsuit after Dakota Access Pipeline Protests.” NPR, February 24, 2025. https://www.npr.org/2025/02/24/nx-s1-5292463/greenpeace-lawsuit-energy-transfer-dakota-access.
41. Phillips, Anna. “Greenpeace Ordered to Pay Dakota Access Pipeline Operator $667 Million in Case That Could Destroy the Group.” The Washington Post , March 19, 2025. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/03/19/greenpeace-dakota-access-pipeline-energy-transfer/.
42. Braun, Ken. “Bailing Out Greenpeace: Lefty Donors Who Could Pay Up for Dakota Access Damages.” Capital Research Center. March 20, 2024. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://capitalresearch.org/article/bailing-out-greenpeace-lefty-donors-who-could-pay-up-for-dakota-access-damages/
43. Bravender, Robin. “Greenpeace’s top legal staffers exit.” E&E News, October 16, 2025. https://www.eenews.net/articles/greenpeaces-top-legal-staffers-exit/
44. “Greenpeace Fund.” Charity Navigator. Accessed August 7, 2025. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/953313195
45. “Charity Navigator – Rating For Greenpeace Fund”. 2017. Charity Navigator. Accessed May 17 2017. https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=7596
46. Brown, Floyd. 2017. “Who Funds The Radical Left In America?”. Western Journalism. Accessed May 17 2017. http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/who-funds-the-radical-left-in-america/.
47. “Twitter”. 2017. Twitter.Com. Accessed May 17 2017. https://twitter.com/greenpeace/status/523808256066461696?lang=en.
48. Krause, Vivian. 2010. “U.S. Foundations Against The Oil Sands”. Financial Post. Accessed May 17 2017. http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/u-s-foundations-against-the-oil-sands.