ST. PAUL, Minn. (Legal Newsline) - The Minnesota Supreme Court is considering whether the state's Free Flow of Information Act (MFFIA) protects newsgatherers like Unicorn Riot from disclosing unpublished materials—even if they are accused of trespassing while gathering news.
The case stems from Energy Transfer LP's ongoing lawsuit against Greenpeace and others over the 2016 protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL).
Unicorn Riot is a decentralized media organization which focuses on issues of policing, “racism” and capitalism, which Energy Transfer has criticized as far-left and outside the mainstream.
Unicorn Riot, embedded with protestors during the demonstrations, was subpoenaed by the company in 2021 to provide unpublished materials, including video footage, communications, and internal documents.
Energy Transfer argues that the Minnesota shield law does not apply because Unicorn Riot allegedly trespassed on private property during the protests.
During a Dec. 10 recent hearing, Richard Snyder, attorney for Energy Transfer, argued that Unicorn Riot’s actions should disqualify it from receiving journalistic protections.
“There’s evidence in the record, for sure, that Unicorn Riot was trespassing on the property,” Snyder said, according to Courthouse News Service. “It was standing side-by-side with the protesters as they breached the fence line and went on to the property and threatened workers.”
The Minnesota Free Flow of Information Act, often referred to as the state’s “shield law,” is designed to protect journalists from being compelled to reveal unpublished information gathered during their reporting, even in the face of legal subpoenas.
Lower courts ruled that the shield law applies, even in the face of accusations of unlawful conduct.
The court also rejected Energy Transfer’s demand that Unicorn Riot create a “privilege log” to disclose materials for potential review.
However, Energy Transfer has pressed the issue all the way to the state’s highest court. At the recent hearing, Associate Justice Karl Procaccini expressed skepticism about the company’s argument.
“So, we assume you’re right, and that Unicorn Riot invaded the rights of your client. To me, the remedy for that invasion is a tort lawsuit,” Procaccini said. “It’s a trespass lawsuit to remedy whatever damage was caused by that tortious conduct.”
This comment suggests that the justices may not see the case as one that requires altering the state’s shield law but instead may believe the issue should be addressed through a standard civil lawsuit.
Matthew Segal, representing Unicorn Riot with the ACLU of Minnesota, defended the media collective’s right to protection under the law.
He emphasized that the Free Flow of Information Act is specifically designed to shield journalists from having to turn over sensitive materials, regardless of whether they are accused of trespassing or other unlawful actions during their reporting.
This case is part of a broader legal battle initiated by Energy Transfer, which owns the Dakota Access Pipeline.
Energy Transfer LP v. Greenpeace International was filed on June 24, 2022, in Hennepin County.
That case is being presided over by Judge Joseph R. Klein.
The company is suing Greenpeace and several other groups and individuals involved in the protests, alleging that they caused significant damage to the pipeline’s construction through “misinformation” and direct actions.
Energy Transfer has claimed damages amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars, and the lawsuit includes a request for access to Unicorn Riot’s newsgathering materials as part of the discovery process.
The Minnesota Supreme Court hearing comes after the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Unicorn Riot in May 2024, upholding the application of the MFFIA and rejecting Energy Transfer’s attempt to obtain the media group’s materials.