The United States disputes the District Court’s legal analysis of North Dakota’s claims and of the United States’ defenses under the Federal Tort Claims Act, but acknowledges in hindsight that, under the Obama Administration, the federal government could have done more to reduce the impacts to the people of North Dakota from the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) protests, which at times rose to the level of unlawfulness and confrontational violence.
Therefore, the United States today settled this litigation with North Dakota in the hope that all parties affected by the chaos of the DAPL protests will be able to move forward with some degree of closure. This settlement allows the United States and the State of North Dakota to resolve this matter and continue working together cooperatively in the future.
While freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble are bedrock principles in our constitutional order, some of the conduct that took place during the height of the DAPL protests in the summer and fall of 2016 was unlawful and not protected free speech or peaceful assembly. Throughout the DAPL protests, the people of North Dakota endured repeated acts of violence and intimidation by protestors who established encampments on federal property without permission. Vehicles were burned, private property was destroyed, public roadways were shut down, and there were clashes with local law enforcement.
To avoid further escalation of unlawful behaviors, the federal government at the time chose not to forcibly remove the protestors from the encampment on federal property. The United States recognizes that this difficult choice had painful consequences for North Dakota and many of its residents. Under President Trump, the United States is committed to protecting its citizens from lawlessness and violence masquerading as “peaceful” or “mostly peaceful” protests.
