Climate Change Defense Permitted in Pipeline Closure Case
A judge in Minnesota will allow two defendants facing criminal charges of shutting down a pair of tar sands pipelines to use a "necessity…
October 17, 2017 at 02:48 PM
4 minute read
Shutterstock
A judge in Minnesota will allow two defendants facing criminal charges of shutting down a pair of tar sands pipelines to use a “necessity defense” at their upcoming jury trial.
The ruling by Judge Robert Tiffany of the Ninth Judicial Circuit in Clearwater County means that the two defendants, Emily Johnston and Annette Klapstein, will be allowed to argue that they acted as they did because of the immediate threat of catastrophic climate change.
Tiffany, in his Oct. 11 order, said the woman had presented a prima facie case that the necessity defense was warranted.
“Minnesota's standard for the necessity defense is high,” Tiffany said. “[T]o successfully assert the defense, a criminal defendant must show that the harm that would have resulted from obeying the law would have significantly exceed the harm actually caused by breaking the law, there was no legal alternative to breaking the law, the defendant was in danger of imminent physical harm, and there was a direct causal connection between breaking the law and preventing the harm.”
A trial date for the two has been set for Dec. 11.
Johnston and Klapstein, both of the Seattle area, were part of the pipeline protests by Direct Climate Action in four states on Oct. 11, 2016. The two allegedly closed emergency valves on two Enbridge Energy pipelines about 35 miles northwest of Bemidji, Minnesota, and then waited to turn themselves in to law enforcement, according to a spokeswoman for the activist group.
The pipelines transport Canadian crude oil to a terminal in Superior, Wisconsin.
Activists from Direct Climate Action took similar actions on three other major pipelines transporting Canadian crude oil, all owned by companies other than Enbridge. They targeted sites in Walhalla, North Dakokta; Coal Banks Landing, Montana; and Anacortes, Washington. All were arrested.
The arrests were first reported by the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Two other defendants face criminal charges for documenting Johnston and Klapstein's action: videographer Steve Liptay and support person Ben Joldersma. They also have been granted permission to present a necessity defense and are to be tried separately from Johnston and Klapstein, according to Direct Climate Action.
“Finally, we'll get to bring climate experts into a court of law, to describe the distance between our current reality and what physics demands of us if we hope to leave a stable planet for our kids,” said Johnston in a statement. “Doing so means there's an outside chance we can bridge that distance—and we need every chance we can get.”
“What we did is not in dispute,” added Klapstein in the statement. “Now we'll be able to present evidence connecting the devastation we're seeing—from hurricanes in the Caribbean to wildfires throughout western North America—to an oil-soaked political system utterly failing to respond.”
Both Clearwater County Attorney David Hanson, who is prosecuting the case, and the women's attorney, Timothy Phillips, of the law office of Joshua Williams in Minneapolis, declined to comment.
According to Direct Climate Action, the first two valve-turners to go to trial—Ken Ward, in Skagit County, Washington, and Michael Foster, together with media support person Sam Jessup, in Pembima County, North Dakota—were not allowed to present necessity defenses. Ward was convicted of one felony. Earlier this month, Foster was convicted on two felony counts and one misdemeanor, and Jessup of one felony and one misdemeanor charge.
Johnston and Klapstein each face charges of criminal damage to critical public service facilities and aiding and abetting, and misdemeanor criminal trespass The charges carry a potential maximum penalty of over 20 years in jail and fines up to $40,000.
Joldersma, who placed calls to Enbridge before Johnston and Klapstein closed the valve to help ensure the pipeline would shut down safely, is charged with conspiracy to commit criminal damage to critical public service facilities. Liptay, a documentary filmmaker who filmed the Johnston and Klapstein's action, faces gross misdemeanor charges of trespass on critical public service facility, utility or pipeline. The charges carry potential time behind bars and fines.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
Trending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250