Constitutional Law
Apr. 25, 2023
Greenpeace didn’t defame logging company, judge rules
Greenpeace had argued that it was exercising its First Amendment right to freedom of speech because the area it alleged Resolute was operating in, the Montagnes Blanches, did not have a consistent definition of its borders.
Greenpeace International successfully defended itself against defamation claims after a federal judge ruled the organization did not act with actual malice when issuing statements that could be construed as claiming a wood products company was inappropriately harvesting in a protected forest area.
Two Greenpeace statements were at issue: that Resolute Forest Products Inc. was contributing to the habitat disturbance of four caribou herds, ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In